Mike and Mike on Owens and Romo

[EPL0c0]

Being typical idiots. Golic basically says that Owens had no argument because he's had more passes thrown to him than Witten has had thrown to him.

But Owens makes a point (and has in the past) that not all passes thrown his way are catchable: too far behind him, too far in front, too high, too low (Owens made a great catch on a super low pass Sunday), too short (the 2nd INT).

How can you hold it against Owens if he doesn't even have a chance to make a play on the ball because it's not well thrown?

I think for lots of people (including some on the forum) picking on Owens has become just something easy they can do because all they have to say is "look at his past." Well look at how he's been since getting to Dallas. He has been everything they could hope for in a WR and teammate. Just bugs me how some folk (media) are so quick to dismiss his opinions. He's the one out there, I'm sure he sees things very differently than we can.

 

[Don Corleone]

Owens needs to focus on getting open. He's had a harder time with that this year than in years past.

 

[Wood]

I remember Troy Aikman playing favorites with Jay Novacek (his security blanket) in pressure situations.....but never once did I hear Michael Irvin make this an issue. Irvin wanted the ball as much as TO but was ultimate team player and would never throw his QB under the bus...especially on national tv.

 

[Primetime0201]

I remember Troy Aikman playing favorites with Jay Novacek (his security blanket) in pressure situations.....but never once did I hear Michael Irvin make this an issue. Irvin wanted the ball as much as TO but was ultimate team player and would never throw his QB under the bus...especially on national tv.

You wouldn't have heard T.O make it an issue either... These unkown losers did. He didn't put it on T.V The unkown losers did. The fact is Romo is a good QB because of T.O. Owens is a Hall Of Fame player and has made it a lot easier on Romo and Witten to do what they do. Owens has big play ability Witten does not. Witten is great don't get me wrong but he can not add to the team what Owens does. That is a fact my friend.
Look at last year when Owens was the primary target and Witten was the #2 or better yet look what happened when we lost Owens. If we lose Owens our Offense drops off big time if we lose Witten I am confident that Bennett can carry the load. I would have been happy with Fassano and Bennett. But I don't think we can afford to lose a top 3 WR.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Being typical idiots. Golic basically says that Owens had no argument because he's had more passes thrown to him than Witten has had thrown to him.

But Owens makes a point (and has in the past) that not all passes thrown his way are catchable: too far behind him, too far in front, too high, too low (Owens made a great catch on a super low pass Sunday), too short (the 2nd INT).

How can you hold it against Owens if he doesn't even have a chance to make a play on the ball because it's not well thrown?

Wait, seriously?

Who blames him for not being able to catch passes that aren't even close to him? Has any receiver in the history of football not had passes that were behind him, over his head, etc?

Nobody blames him for that and that's not even the issue. The issue is his complaining about not getting the ball enough when we're already trying to get it to him as much as we can.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Being typical idiots. Golic basically says that Owens had no argument because he's had more passes thrown to him than Witten has had thrown to him.

But Owens makes a point (and has in the past) that not all passes thrown his way are catchable: too far behind him, too far in front, too high, too low (Owens made a great catch on a super low pass Sunday), too short (the 2nd INT).

How can you hold it against Owens if he doesn't even have a chance to make a play on the ball because it's not well thrown?

I think for lots of people (including some on the forum) picking on Owens has become just something easy they can do because all they have to say is "look at his past." Well look at how he's been since getting to Dallas. He has been everything they could hope for in a WR and teammate. Just bugs me how some folk (media) are so quick to dismiss his opinions. He's the one out there, I'm sure he sees things very differently than we can.

Man I wish we had that perfect QB.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I remember Troy Aikman playing favorites with Jay Novacek (his security blanket) in pressure situations.....but never once did I hear Michael Irvin make this an issue. Irvin wanted the ball as much as TO but was ultimate team player and would never throw his QB under the bus...especially on national tv.

Exactly. That's the biggest difference between Owens and Irvin.


And while I agree that not all of the passes are catchable for Owens, as they aren't for all recievers, do you see Tony going around complaining about the ones that hits Owens right in his hands and he drops?

No.

 

[EPL0c0]

I don't think Owens has thrown anybody under the bus. If anybody has, it's those idiot "anonymous scourses".

Terrance Newman was on Mike and Mike after I posted and he said that he felt Owens needs to get the ball more. When they breakdown the film for Sunday's game, they'll see examples of guys wide open and Romo either not reading them or not opting to hit them.

If RoyE or Crayton had a boost in their receptions, I'd say ok, he's just not throwing to Owens, but Romo isn't throwing to the other guys much (WR, RB, TE).

I think a big part is the play calling though...it's not all entirely on Romo, which is why it was smart to go to Garrett.

the folks over at ESPN were talking about how many passes Owens has had thrown to him, but they never mention how a bunch are uncatchable passes. The way they spin it, every pass going his way is on target and it's HIS fault they're not caught. This is a pretty unfair thing to say about Owens if the caveat that not all passes were catchable. I'm not discounting Owens' drops, but we have seen quite a bit of passes that were off target, that, if on target, he could have done so much with.