My Meaningless Thoughts On the Game...

[Yakuza Rich]

Don't get me wrong, I'm concerned about the defense as well. But the 3-4 isn't the problem, in fact it's done well from a pass rush perspective. Zimmer is a lousy D-Coordinator and is one of the worst, if not the worst at getting his defenses to sack the QB. People forget this which happens, but just take a look at the sack totals from 2000 - 2006 and any other sacks statistics under Zimmer. They were pathetic.

Watching the game over again, the secondary play was horrendous last night. The pressure wasn't that bad. I can see what Wade is saying by 'I see things you don't', meaning that the pressure is there but the coverage is so bad that unless you're getting a pass rush like the '85 Bears defense, then the QB will likely get the ball off. Scandrick, Newman and Hamlin struggled badly last night. I've never been much of a Campo fan. He had success here when we had a loaded defense with fantastic defensive backs, one of whom was arguably the greatest cover corner that ever lived. In just over a year taking over our secondary we've seen Dallas get a low amount of interception totals despite leading the league in sacks last season and what looks like a regression in the play of the cornerbacks this year.

Turnover margin is such a big factor in NFL and about 3/4ths of the turnovers in the league are from the QB's. So if your QB is turning the ball over, you're losing half the battle. If your defense cannot force the opposing QB to make turnovers, then you're losing the other half of the battle.





YAKUZA

 

[AdamJT13]

Put him against a team that is somewhat disciplined and not soft and if Romo doesn't have his 'A' game going the team will lose because of him. Let me make that clear, if the defense is pretty good (not great) and Romo is a little off, we will assuredly lose because of Romo. It's almost as good of a guarantee as you will find in the NFL.

Uh, that's usually a combination for losing -- quarterback is off, combined with not great defense. It doesn't matter which team or quarterback it is.

Only nine of Romo's starts fall into that category, and we're 2-7 in those games. Roethlisberger is 2-12 in those types of games. Eli is 6-23. Brees is 5-31. Peyton Manning is 2-35. Tom Brady is 4-23.

 

[NoLuv4Jerry]

this guy is way off...this organization is RELEVANT again because of #9. If we had to rely on this defense to win games we would be a sub .500 team. There is one exceptions l player in defense, Ware...and one very good player..Ratliff. THAT IS IT!!!!!!!!!!

Romo has won 70% of his games. He has beaten the Giants OFTEN. He had a bad game. Stop asking him to win every games and then we will see what the rest of the team has got.

 

[nalam]

Again, as bad as Romo played last night, he led the team to 31 points and the lead with 2 minutes to go.

Not absolving Romo, he played very badly, but he still put this team in position to win.

I think Lot of us miss the point , thats the reason for this type of comments. :bang2:

Usually bumbling Manning had a very efficient ( mistake free) game . Imagine if Romo had been a bit efficient (I'll excuse the freak witten cleat-bouncing interception, but the other 2 were awful. So if we take those 14 points away this game would have been a roadkill.

That is what is needed, this team is talented but not talented enough to repeat the same mistakes consistenly to win.

 

[AdamJT13]

For us to be successful in the playoffs (if we even get there), he will likely have to have two-three games of nearly mistake-free football. I don't think he's had a single stretch like that in his career save his first few starts in 2006.

In 2007, we had a seven-game winning streak when he had one or fewer interceptions and a rating of at least 102.5 in every game.

 

[nalam]

For us to be successful in the playoffs (if we even get there), he will likely have to have two-three games of nearly mistake-free football. I don't think he's had a single stretch like that in his career save his first few starts in 2006. It would require some quick mental maturation, much like what Manning went through two years ago.

I don't think Garrett or especially Phillips is going to get out the choke chain any time soon. It will have to wait until 2010 and whomever is in charge then.

 

[gbrittain]

At this point I'm far more concerned about the defense than I am Romo.

No turnovers since the Baltimore game last year.

Over 800 yds in total offense given up the first two weeks.

Yeah, mistake free quaterbacking is an important part of a playoff-success soup, but what about a defense that can actually stop someone or force a turnover? And when your head coach is suppose to be some kind of defense guru and it still looks as bad as what this defense does-- that just makes my head hurt.

This post.

I can't wait to bring in a bus driving QB. Yipee, instead of losing 31-30 in the last few minutes, we can all but be assured of a loss by the 3rd quarter down 31 to 10.

You can't win jack with a defense ranked around 30 and one that can't force turnovers or pressure the QB all that well either.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Uh, that's usually a combination for losing -- quarterback is off, combined with not great defense. It doesn't matter which team or quarterback it is.

Only nine of Romo's starts fall into that category, and we're 2-7 in those games. Roethlisberger is 2-12 in those types of games. Eli is 6-23. Brees is 5-31. Peyton Manning is 2-35. Tom Brady is 4-23.

You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. If Romo is a little off with his accuracy, 9 times out of 10 he starts being reckless with the ball. When guys like Peyton or Brees or Brady is a little off in their accuracy, they typically are not reckless with the ball. And usually there's a good reason why these QB's are off with their accuracy....O-Line playing poorly, WR's dropping passes, no running game, etc. Can't say the O-Line didn't play well against the G-Men last night or the WR's were dropping passes left and right, etc.

So when these guys are off with their accuracy a bit and not on their 'A' game, they can be smarter with the ball and protect the football. But, Romo just would rather make horrendous decisions and not put the ball up for grabs because that would imply the WR's would have chance at the ball, but just about guarantee a turnover.

The sooner the organization looks to replace him, the better off we'll be.





YAKUZA

 

[Aikmaniac]

You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. If Romo is a little off with his accuracy, 9 times out of 10 he starts being reckless with the ball. When guys like Peyton or Brees or Brady is a little off in their accuracy, they typically are not reckless with the ball. And usually there's a good reason why these QB's are off with their accuracy....O-Line playing poorly, WR's dropping passes, no running game, etc. Can't say the O-Line didn't play well against the G-Men last night or the WR's were dropping passes left and right, etc.

So when these guys are off with their accuracy a bit and not on their 'A' game, they can be smarter with the ball and protect the football. But, Romo just would rather make horrendous decisions and not put the ball up for grabs because that would imply the WR's would have chance at the ball, but just about guarantee a turnover.

The sooner the organization looks to replace him, the better off we'll be.





YAKUZA

I can't believe it's you that is posting this drivel.

Aren't you the same guy that was heavily involved in the CHutch/QC debates?

 

[kmd24]

The sooner the organization looks to replace him, the better off we'll be.

Hyperbole much? Sells newspapers, I guess.

Like most of us, I watch several games every week, and there is just as bad or worse QB play going on almost everywhere. It's a roller coaster with Romo, but the bottom line for me is that he can be very good, and lots of teams win despite bad QB play, but it usually takes a good defensive effort to overcome it.

Dallas expects Romo to carry the team much more than most other teams. Maybe we'd better off if the coaches took the game out of Romo's hands occasionally, especially when he's struggling. Instead, our OC gives him opportunities to make mistakes.

We won't get a better QB than Romo for at least a couple of years. Time for the staff to start making the best of what they've got.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I can't believe it's you that is posting this drivel.

Aren't you the same guy that was heavily involved in the CHutch/QC debates?

No, I wasn't.



YAKUZA

 

[TheSkaven]

Kids need discipline. I'm not ready to give up on Romo yet because he is talented and smart. He WAS coachable, but somehow he seems to have lost that attribute. He lost his way but this can still be corrected. As Parcells liked to say, you can't just call 1-800 quarterback.

I'm disappointed about the loss but there were so many positives. The offensive line played incredible. This team had FOUR turnovers and was in the game until the last play against a team ordained as one of the best teams in the NFC. When does THAT happen?

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Hyperbole much? Sells newspapers, I guess.

Like most of us, I watch several games every week, and there is just as bad or worse QB play going on almost everywhere. It's a roller coaster with Romo, but the bottom line for me is that he can be very good, and lots of teams win despite bad QB play, but it usually takes a good defensive effort to overcome it.

Romo's great games almost always come against mediocre to bad defenses. His awful games can be against anywhere from mediocre to great offenses. Usually if the defense is pretty good, we are in trouble. The big thing is he doesn't protect the ball and doesn't seem to care to protect the ball.

Looking to replace him as quick as possible, but in a sensible manner would be good for Dallas. In '01 the Chargers made Drew Brees the first pick in the 2nd round and he was set to the be the franchise QB. After '03 the Chargers pretty much gave up on him for the most part and then drafted Phillip Rivers in '04. But a funny thing happened...Brees had a fantastic year. He then had a very good '05 season. So the Chargers had a great problem on their hands, a Pro Bowl QB and a high first round pick with All Pro potential. And if you ask the right people close to the Chargers situation, they will tell you that Brees was certainly motivated to keep his job because his offseason workouts were far more intense than the previous years with the team.

In the end the Chargers let Brees go and wound up with a great QB (who also led his team to the AFC Championship game in '07 before losing to a historic Patriots team). And if the Chargers execs were not so incompetent, they could've traded away Brees for a lot of picks (although to their credit, he did tear his labrum just months before).

There are potentially 3 great QB's coming up in this draft (Bradford, McCoy, and Tebow). Certainly we'd have to scout them out and see what the scouts think. But in recent years we've seen Ryan in Atlanta, Flacco in Baltimore, Roethlisberger in Pittsburgh and now Sanchez in NYJ come out and have very solid rookie years and then get better in year two and see their team seriously contend for the Super Bowl. I think we can do that as well if these QB's have got 'it', I don't think Romo does.





YAKUZA

 

[starfrombirth]

I think this team is far more mentally soft than they are physically soft.

My thoughts on Romo are like dealing with the friend who is a drug addict that constantly relapses. After awhile you don't want to stop being their friend and you don't want to stop rooting for them to get better, but you are just at the point where you refuse to believe a word they say until they prove you beyond a shadow of a doubt otherwise.

I refuse to believe Romo will stop making careless decisions (and that's what it's about, not about a misread or a great play that's understandable, but careless decisions) until he proves me wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt.






YAKUZA

Ok if you are part of the get rid of romo movement then you should be the president of the get rid of Flozell movement. How many drive killing penalties has he had? Not only is he "THE" most penalized player in the nfl over the last 3 years but nearly everyone of his penalties has negated a big play and caused us to punt. He's garbage and he needs to be gone before anyone else to send a message. Romo may have interceptions but at least he tosses touchdowns as well. With Flozell we get the penalties along with the added benefit of our qb running for his life. If you are going to go off on one of the perpetrators then go after the most prominant perpetrator.

 

[AdamJT13]

You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. If Romo is a little off with his accuracy, 9 times out of 10 he starts being reckless with the ball.

How did I misinterpret that when you said something completely different?

The word "accuracy" never appeared in your original post, but you did talk about how having a "pretty good but not great" defense and losing, which have nothing to do with what you now claim you meant.

When guys like Peyton or Brees or Brady is a little off in their accuracy, they typically are not reckless with the ball.

No, they only throw interceptions when they're accurate, of course.

So when these guys are off with their accuracy a bit and not on their 'A' game, they can be smarter with the ball and protect the football.

So how does Peyton throw six picks in one game? How does Brady have more four-interception games than anyone else this decade? How does Brees have the second-most interceptions in the past two seasons (trailing Favre by two)? They get careless with the football, too. If you get rid of Romo, good luck finding someone better anytime in the next 10 years.

 

[AdamJT13]

Romo's great games almost always come against mediocre to bad defenses.

That's not true at all. Six of his nine highest-rated games (all 123.1 or higher) have come against good to great defenses -- the 2007 Giants (twice), the 2007 Eagles, the 2008 Eagles, the 2007 Commanders and the 2007 Packers. He also posted a 113.7 against the 2008 Giants.

He also has a 102.0 career rating against teams that made it to the Super Bowl that season.

The notion that he feasts only on bad teams and stinks when he has to face a good team is a complete fabrication.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

So how does Peyton throw six picks in one game? How does Brady have more four-interception games than anyone else this decade? How does Brees have the second-most interceptions in the past two seasons (trailing Favre by two)? They get careless with the football, too. If you get rid of Romo, good luck finding someone better anytime in the next 10 years.

Yes, because Peyton throwing 6 picks in a rain soaked game one time is the same as Romo's multiple times of throwing 3, 4 or even 5 picks in a game. Brady and Brees throw the ball more than Romo, so more picks will and should happen.

Right now I'd take the following over Romo:

- Tom Brady
- Mark Sanchez
- Ben Roethlisberger
- Joe Flacco
- Phillip Rivers
- Eli Manning
- Jay Cutler
- Aaron Rodgers
- Drew Brees
- Matt Ryan

All guys drafted in the last 10 years. And others like Carson Palmer, Trent Edwards, etc. that are up in the air as to which guy I would take. We've got the talent to bring in a top draft pick at QB, get him playing right away and protect him and get a guy that can produce and not turn the ball over.





YAKUZA

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Ok if you are part of the get rid of romo movement then you should be the president of the get rid of Flozell movement. How many drive killing penalties has he had? Not only is he "THE" most penalized player in the nfl over the last 3 years but nearly everyone of his penalties has negated a big play and caused us to punt. He's garbage and he needs to be gone before anyone else to send a message. Romo may have interceptions but at least he tosses touchdowns as well. With Flozell we get the penalties along with the added benefit of our qb running for his life. If you are going to go off on one of the perpetrators then go after the most prominant perpetrator.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of Flozell either. But like it or not, penalties have an entirely lesser impact on the game than turnovers. The numbers show that over and over and over again. And a false start to me isn't reckless. And not every holding call is careless either. But throwing the picks that Romo does when he's specifically been warned against it is careless.





YAKUZA

 

[AdamJT13]

Yes, because Peyton throwing 6 picks in a rain soaked game one time is the same as Romo's multiple times of throwing 3, 4 or even 5 picks in a game. Brady and Brees throw the ball more than Romo, so more picks will and should happen.

I thought you said they knew how to protect the ball? Now you're saying they should throw interceptions? And Brees should throw fewer interceptions, given that a much higher percentage of his passes are screens and dumpoffs. When he has to throw downfield, he gets picked off way too much.

Right now I'd take the following over Romo:

- Tom Brady
- Mark Sanchez
- Ben Roethlisberger
- Joe Flacco
- Phillip Rivers
- Eli Manning
- Jay Cutler
- Aaron Rodgers
- Drew Brees
- Matt Ryan

All guys drafted in the last 10 years. And others like Carson Palmer, Trent Edwards, etc. that are up in the air as to which guy I would take. We've got the talent to bring in a top draft pick at QB, get him playing right away and protect him and get a guy that can produce and not turn the ball over.

Like I said, good luck with that. You'll almost certainly end up with the same number of bad games and fewer good ones.

 

[SultanOfSix]

As much as had a distaste for Romo's play yesterday, I feel that the defense was much worse. This is supposedly Wade, the defensive guru's defense we're talking about. We know Romo will make the occasional boneheaded play right now, which he does have to shore up. The only interception that really cost the team was the first boneheaded one. The second was just an inaccurate throw that all QBs make once in a while that happened to get a lucky bounce off of Witten's legs right into the arms of a defender, and the last one was simply like a punt. Yeah, they were bad plays but outside of the first one, hardly game changers or really that boneheaded.