Looking at game again first 3 drives, Romo choked...

[ctalker]

Romo wasn't very good along with the rest of the offense. Sure he should get some blame, he is the O leader and didn't play that well along with the rest of the O. However, He is a very good QB and gives us a chance to compete for Superbowls.

I have been pretty critical of him in the past because I want a great QB like Aikman, Staubach or Elway. But I have come to realize that my thinking is flawed and that Romo gives us our best chance to win. It is very difficult to find an NFL QB with his talent.

 

[Gzus]

Romo wasn't very good along with the rest of the offense. Sure he should get some blame, he is the O leader and didn't play that well along with the rest of the O. However, He is a very good QB and gives us a chance to compete for Superbowls.

I have been pretty critical of him in the past because I want a great QB like Aikman, Staubach or Elway. But I have come to realize that my thinking is flawed and that Romo gives us our best chance to win. It is very difficult to find an NFL QB with his talent.

It's true, we all want a Aikman or a Staubach, but the fact of the matter is that those QBs are judged in the end by their body of work, the entire body of work. As of right now we bash Romo and say he's not the QB we want, but in the end it may be a different story. I would dare any of the Romo bashers to tattoo the fact they think Romo is a choker and a horrible QB and I would love to see how they like it in ten years if Romo happens to win a Super Bowl. As people have mentioned, people bashed Manning for years until he won a Super Bowl and now he's some great amazing QB. The fact was that he was a great QB all along but people always said he sucked because the rest of his team hadn't gelled enough for them to go all the way. In the end a QB is judged by how well the rest of the team played in addition to him and it's understandable for people to bash him until he wins a SB. But I guarantee you those same people will come back and say they knew he was a great QB all along and he's a Hall of Famer once he wins the big one. So as I said I challenge one of you Romo bashers to go ahead and tattoo your stance on him and look foolish when he finally gets a team that melds enough to win the big one.

 

[RainMan]

It's true, we all want a Aikman or a Staubach, but the fact of the matter is that those QBs are judged in the end by their body of work, the entire body of work. As of right now we bash Romo and say he's not the QB we want, but in the end it may be a different story. I would dare any of the Romo bashers to tattoo the fact they think Romo is a choker and a horrible QB and I would love to see how they like it in ten years if Romo happens to win a Super Bowl. As people have mentioned, people bashed Manning for years until he won a Super Bowl and now he's some great amazing QB. The fact was that he was a great QB all along but people always said he sucked because the rest of his team hadn't gelled enough for them to go all the way. In the end a QB is judged by how well the rest of the team played in addition to him and it's understandable for people to bash him until he wins a SB. But I guarantee you those same people will come back and say they knew he was a great QB all along and he's a Hall of Famer once he wins the big one. So as I said I challenge one of you Romo bashers to go ahead and tattoo your stance on him and look foolish when he finally gets a team that melds enough to win the big one.

Great points.

As for the original topic, I don't think Romo had his best game by any stretch. He was on-the-money with his passes throughout the first half, but he was holding onto the ball a bit long even when Flozell was in the game. He seemed flustered to the point where instead of standing tall in the pocket, he seemed to start squirming around too early before giving the play a chance to develop. I don't agree Romo "choked," but I don't believe he is absolved from taking any blame. Just about everyone deserves a chunk for yesterday's complete and thorough butt whooping.

With that said, I think it's important to remember that while Romo wasn't at his best, what the Vikings did is ultimately the one -- and only? -- way to beat top-of-the-line quarterbacks. You have to create constant and devestating pressure with your front four, thereby allowing you to drop everyone else into coverage and not leave gaping holes as created when blitzing. Brees, Brady and Manning have all looked similarly helpless in those situations. It happens. In such an instance, when you know you've got the right QB -- as we do -- the onus shifts toward needing to figure out how you can ensure you get better protection in the future. That, and try to devise plays that allow getting rid of the ball quickly.

 

[dbair1967]

It is amazing to me the revisionist history some have, even when the "history" was just two days ago.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Great points.

As for the original topic, I don't think Romo had his best game by any stretch. He was on-the-money with his passes throughout the first half, but he was holding onto the ball a bit long even when Flozell was in the game. He seemed flustered to the point where instead of standing tall in the pocket, he seemed to start squirming around too early before giving the play a chance to develop. I don't agree Romo "choked," but I don't believe he is absolved from taking any blame. Just about everyone deserves a chunk for yesterday's complete and thorough butt whooping.

With that said, I think it's important to remember that while Romo wasn't at his best, what the Vikings did is ultimately the one -- and only? -- way to beat top-of-the-line quarterbacks. You have to create constant and devestating pressure with your front four, thereby allowing you to drop everyone else into coverage and not leave gaping holes as created when blitzing. Brees, Brady and Manning have all looked similarly helpless in those situations. It happens. In such an instance, when you know you've got the right QB -- as we do -- the onus shifts toward needing to figure out how you can ensure you get better protection in the future. That, and try to devise plays that allow getting rid of the ball quickly.

And get him more than one WR.

 

[Joe_Fan]

No offense but after your unending support of Quincy I would think that you're the last person who should be analyzing Qb's and their play.

 

[Joe_Fan]

Peyton Manning would "choke" if the pocket collapsed on virtually every play. You get to any QB enough times and they will look mediocre. Remember what Dallas did to Matt Ryan in the Atlanta game? He was supposed to be the second coming.

Remember how "well" the great Favre played when he faced non-stop pressure back in 2007?

Yeah, he sure did play great.

 

[Joe_Fan]

3 fumbles, 2 while not being touched......lol

Fixed.

 

[ms9221]

BTW, I'm looking at game again...
First drive ball on 35 1st and 10, good protection, Romo holds ball to long instead of hanging in the pocket and stepping up he gets scared, looks lost, and fumbles....

2nd possesion ball on the 40, good protection, panicks and throws ball away.. then fumble snaps, no one touches him.....then instead of going for it on 4th and 1 we try a 50 yard FG---I know it was 48 but come on 4th and 1.....

3rd possesion, 1st and goal, 1st play wildcat, stupid...2nd and goal from the 8 shotgun formation, then 3 steps drop, panicks again, all he has to do is step up to the right had a whole passing lane, but spins left and gets sack... 3rd and goal from the 14, shotgun formation, drops back panicks again, all he had to do was step up and hit crayton over middle for TD, but Romo spins left again and throws ball away......

The only reason why I bring this up because while looking at game I saw the same thing so I just had to watch the first 3 series again because that to me was the telling point of the game to me.... 3 times in scoring position, one lousy FG...

While they were getting a little pressure it was coming from containment outside and Romo kept rolling right in to it....TO me looking at game again at least the first 3 series of the game Romo looked scared and lost...

Shut the Heck up! You need to stop blaming Romo. You are IDoit . The Left side Offense Line did us in.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

So I guess since it was a great called game bring back the whole coaching staff. Just fire the OL coach..... And all that about me saying I don't know what I'm talking about. talking smack you guys are in the same boat, at least I have family in the NFL and played 4 years for the boys and heard the stories....first hand about Romo, TO and everyone else....

Oh really?

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

There are some pieces lost in this:

First, the Vikings focused on Dallas during their bi-week because they believed that Dallas would beat Philly and be their opponent. The Vikings players have stated that they knew all of the Cowboys tendencies and that Dallas made very few adjustments. Is some of that on Garrett? I would say, to an extent, yes.

When the other team knows exactly what you are doing and calling the right defenses to counter your routes, it will cause some doubt. After that first sack, Romo was indeed rattled in the pocket, but that was because his first reads were not there and he knew there was pressure in the vicinity. Is some of that on Romo? To an extent, yes.

Romo was sacked and pressured more than any game this year and it showed. Was some of that on the offensive line? To an extent, yes. Columbo in particular was whipped up front.

Austin and Witten were being blanketed and by the time they were freed up Romo was running to avoid the pressure or sacked. Is that their fault? to an extent, yes. Austin is a Pro-Bowler and so is Witten, it is their job to fid a crease. Garrett and Romo have no confidence that Roy will step up and did not look his way. That is on Roy for not being all that great this season as well as the coaches for not putting Crayton in over him, who is by far the best on this team at finding seams in the defense when plays break down.

I guess what I'm saying is, at the end of the day, this team lost as a team, not because of any one player or coach. I give major credit to the Vikings Coaches for gambling that they would play Dallas and focusing the majority of their time on them while Dallas was trying to beat the Eagles. That extra week of prep paid off handsomely. They beat us in game plan and execution. Top to bottom loss and every player should share in the blame.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Romo was not the problem. The oline was the problem. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[DWhite Fan]

After looking at this thread again, we see that Q_the_man choked

 

[Maikeru-sama]

People still trying to say Tony Romo choked?

Again, we did not lose this game because of Tony Romo.

I am shocked that he only threw 1 interceptions with the amount of pressure he was under.

No adjustments were made in the Play Calling and the Offensive Line got pushed around.

 

[Doomsday101]

Aaron Rodgers dealt with the pressure just fine. He was pressured all day and the Pack still managed to score points. While the outcome was the same, the Pack stayed competitive. I'm tired of hearing that it wasn't Romo's fault.

Romo shares in the loss and so now what? This team lost the game Romo is part of the team and shares in it looking at this game many others do as well.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

It is amazing to me the revisionist history some have, even when the "history" was just two days ago.

It will only get worse as we get deeper into the Offseason.

 

[JBond]

The accusations of the OP are ridiculous. The OL and the inability of the staff to change with game conditions is what cost us the game. The first two drives we did mix things up and we moved the ball. It is the job of the OL to keep Romo clean and they failed horrible. Those that want to look past the absolute failure of the OL know little about football. They were beat with a four man rush on a regular basis. The vikes sent 5 or 6 a couple time in the first two drives and we beat them. When they were able to run through our line with only four rushers and drop everyone else into coverage we did not adjust. Horrible OL play plus the inability to adjust = a loss.

A question for those that absolve our OL and want to blame Romo. Are you comfortable with the same exact OL starting next season?

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

How does someone choke in the 1st Q?

Nate Kaeding choked. Romo was a victim.

Who gave Drew Bledsoe an account?

 

[Doomsay]

Great points.

As for the original topic, I don't think Romo had his best game by any stretch. He was on-the-money with his passes throughout the first half, but he was holding onto the ball a bit long even when Flozell was in the game. He seemed flustered to the point where instead of standing tall in the pocket, he seemed to start squirming around too early before giving the play a chance to develop. I don't agree Romo "choked," but I don't believe he is absolved from taking any blame. Just about everyone deserves a chunk for yesterday's complete and thorough butt whooping.

With that said, I think it's important to remember that while Romo wasn't at his best, what the Vikings did is ultimately the one -- and only? -- way to beat top-of-the-line quarterbacks. You have to create constant and devestating pressure with your front four, thereby allowing you to drop everyone else into coverage and not leave gaping holes as created when blitzing. Brees, Brady and Manning have all looked similarly helpless in those situations. It happens. In such an instance, when you know you've got the right QB -- as we do -- the onus shifts toward needing to figure out how you can ensure you get better protection in the future. That, and try to devise plays that allow getting rid of the ball quickly.

And get him more than one WR.

Great posts. Dispensing with the strawman "Romo chocked" argument we can have a reasonable discussion about the non-Oline problems we had on offense Sunday, even if they were 80% of the problem. Hopefully we won't see pressure at catastrophic levels like that again but we clearly need 2 capable and trustworthy starting receivers that Romo can rely on. Being up in the Northeast, the buzz is that Welker allows Brady to escape sacks like no other receiver that he has ever played with and his loss was part of the reason he was holding onto the ball so long on Saturday. Romo has that outlet with Witten, but a TE isn't always going to be running patterns. Can't have a receiver getting more snaps than any other (regular season) not be a viable target for Tony.

 

[MONT17]

revisionist history of Romo trying to be Tom Brady for a reason... his OLine is BIG, OLD and not too impress with a QB who fumbles snaps!


Flozell quit, the Oline quit and the entire team quit bc the QB was over-matched, again!