PFT: Rosenhaus Says “Several Teams” Are Interested In Owens

[TellerMorrow34]

It would be the first time he's ever arrived at a team and they've gotten worse, if that's the case.

I'm not a TO worshiper, but it's ridiculous to say he makes teams worse on Sunday. His issues have always stemmed from incidents regarding team chemistry, not that he doesn't produce on the field.

I do agree there. I don't think the issue is in his individual ability to play or produce.

 

[jimmy40]

I'm spotting over here.

 

[khiladi]

The fact that Glenn was triple covered and TO wasn't open on that final play isn't exactly a shining example of how TO is so great and everything that ever goes wrong on the teams around him is always everyone elses fault and he shoulders no blame.

The guy has never won like a lot of other guys but in his case it's not his fault it's everyone else around him whose at fault?

I've already told you who is at fault primarily. Jason Garrett is at fault for not adjusting the whole year. The example I gave was not to prove that TO is great, but it is an example of how TR makes some bone-headed INTs, trying to force the ball to players. Every fan recognized this issue in the beginning of the season and last season, and even Parcells realized it.
TR did it again with Witten and the Ravens. You can find examples of it over and over again, where it wasn't TO, TR was throwing it to.

Some were saying, "It's OK. I can live with it, because Romo makes enough plays to overcome it." Well guess what? It has come back to haunt this offense. Irony is, people forgot about their previous statements and used TO as a scape-goat saying it was TO who was forcing Romo to throw the ball into double-coverage and triple coverage.

The example exemplifies how Jason Garrett has not reigned Tony Romo in but made him actually worse.

Also, TO was the "I" receiver in Garrett's offense. That terminology Garrett took from the Norv days, and he is the primary target. If TO is not the primary target, then some other receiver is. There is a reason he gets the majority of passes thrown his way. The issue is not TO being the "I" receiver, the issue is how he is used as the "I" receiver.

 

[khiladi]

Re-read what I said please. i said they did play till they reached certain milestones in the Commander game and then they were pulled. It was pretty clear not a single player on that team, offense or defense, gave a crap about that game cause they had already locked up homefield, and 13 wins, and were going to leave the game early.

I believe Romo and Witten played one series into the 3rd quarter and were then pulled.

The only game that they played the whole way, and it mattered, was the Carolina game that TO got hurt in the second quarter of. They played a little over a half without him. The first full game that mattered that they played in after he was hurt was the Giants playoff game and he was back for that, had 4 catches and a score, in a loss to the Giants.

That doesn't change the fact they were inept. They had negative yardage. So your going to go out there and risk injury to be totally inept. If you rnot going to care about trying to do anything productive, then why be out their in the first place? The Giants didn't have to play the Patriots well in the final regular season game, but they actually were productive.

And TO got hurt when they were already winning and moving the ball with ease. As soon as he left, the offense stagnated I believe. The Giants game, he had those numbers on a high-ankle sprain.

 

[khiladi]

I do agree there. I don't think the issue is in his individual ability to play or produce.

And yet, your blaming him for not bringing this team a championship. No one player brings a team a championship. It is a team game. A player can put a team over the edge, like a Charles Haley. We had too many issues on this team besides TO. The most one can argue about TO is the drama he brings. But the media has been that way with the Cowboys before TO. Nobody can argue his play on the field.

Even Dan reeves said, after analyzing the tape, he has a positive impact on the running game.

 

[I LOVE ME SOME ME!]

I hope he goes to the Raiders. Or that if he goes to a contender they suddenly flop. The reactions of the TO cabal will be hilarious.

Why would you hope he goes to a bad team, or that he fails? Get a life man. Real talk.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I've already told you who is at fault primarily. Jason Garrett is at fault for not adjusting the whole year. The example I gave was not to prove that TO is great, but it is an example of how TR makes some bone-headed INTs, trying to force the ball to players. Every fan recognized this issue in the beginning of the season and last season, and even Parcells realized it.
TR did it again with Witten and the Ravens. You can find examples of it over and over again, where it wasn't TO, TR was throwing it to.

Some were saying, "It's OK. I can live with it, because Romo makes enough plays to overcome it." Well guess what? It has come back to haunt this offense. Irony is, people forgot about their previous statements and used TO as a scape-goat saying it was TO who was forcing Romo to throw the ball into double-coverage and triple coverage.

The example exemplifies how Jason Garrett has not reigned Tony Romo in but made him actually worse.

Also, TO was the "I" receiver in Garrett's offense. That terminology Garrett took from the Norv days, and he is the primary target. If TO is not the primary target, then some other receiver is. There is a reason he gets the majority of passes thrown his way. The issue is not TO being the "I" receiver, the issue is how he is used as the "I" receiver.

Hey I wasn't the biggest fan of Garrett's offense last year either and it often bothered me as well. But my problem is that Romo forced that pass into TG in triple coverage, while he had plenty of time, so you're saying that it was just because Romo makes mistakes and TO was standing off out there someone wide open?

That isn't what I saw there. I saw him stand back there, for a few seconds, looking around the field and having NO ONE, including TO, get open and just threw the ball to Terry praying that it would actually wind up in his hands.

The fact that the ball eventually got thrown into such a hopeless situation is a problem from the entire set of WR's not getting open. Which included TO.

I also saw Tony throw 2 INT's in the Steelers game (Which is the one I beleive you're talking about, not the Ravens game) when he was throwing to TO. On one particular one, an out, it was picked off because TO quit running on his route and allowed the defender to just waltz right to the spot and pick it off.

On one of Romos picks by Ed Reed in the Baltimore game it happened when Romo was trying to force the ball down the sidelines toward TO. So, yeah, Romo throws INTs while throwing to other players, without a doubt, he also throws them while trying to force the ball to TO.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

And yet, your blaming him for not bringing this team a championship. No one player brings a team a championship. It is a team game. A player can put a team over the edge, like a Charles Haley. We had too many issues on this team besides TO. The most one can argue about TO is the drama he brings. But the media has been that way with the Cowboys before TO. Nobody can argue his play on the field.

Even Dan reeves said, after analyzing the tape, he has a positive impact on the running game.

I said that because you, and others, have acted like without him there is NO HOPE of a team winning a championship. We have a couple of guys around here, yourself mostly, who some how thinks that the loss of TO is the absolute end of the world and that now the rest of the offense, and the playmakers they've assembled, are just going to suck because we didn't keep TO.

It's hilarious how someone says TO can't help win a championship and it's "a team game" and we're bullying him but those same people turn around and make the claim that this team is in trouble and can't win cause TO isn't here.

So which is it? Is it a team game or is it a TO game?

And yes the media has already been like that with the Cowboys. I also remember the Cowboys getting rid of guys who brought lots of media attention, even after they helped win a Superbowl. Duane Thomas and Hollywood Henderson were actually part of teams that won Superbowls and they were still let loose, despite the fact that they could produce and help their team win, because at some point the drama, and the constant media crap, and the headaches simply aren't worth it.

If TO and this team had won a playoff game or two while he was here he'd still be here, I have no doubt. But without some playoff success it's simply not worth all the extra to have TO on the field. Or at least that would appear to be what Jerry Jones is saying by cutting him.

 

[Oh_Canada]

Denver, S.F or Oakland.

 

[Hostile]

Why would you hope he goes to a bad team, or that he fails? Get a life man. Real talk.

Spare me your advice. I wish him well. I said it would crack me up. Get over it, or don't. I really don't give a hang.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

That doesn't change the fact they were inept. They had negative yardage. So your going to go out there and risk injury to be totally inept. If you rnot going to care about trying to do anything productive, then why be out their in the first place? The Giants didn't have to play the Patriots well in the final regular season game, but they actually were productive.

And TO got hurt when they were already winning and moving the ball with ease. As soon as he left, the offense stagnated I believe. The Giants game, he had those numbers on a high-ankle sprain.

There's always excuses. Always. The only thing that matters in the playoff is did the team win?

TO was out there, he said he was healthy and ready to go, so he was out there. Did they win?

No. I don't care about the excuses. They played, they didn't win, and TO was part of that not winning.

I love how this guy, great as he can be, gets all this credit for being a HUGE part of all the wins but when it comes to the losses there is always an excuse. Well he was hurt, well so and so didn't do this, well so and so didn't do that.


It's only a team game when the argument is beneficial to TO's case. The moment it's not it's not a team game anymore it's everyone except TO's fault.

Bro the guy was, and is, a great WR. He was productive here and I enjoyed watching him and cheered him on. He'll go somewhere else and be productive for them and their fans will love him and hate him.

The bottom line is this team didn't win anymore championships, or playoff games for that matter, with him here as they'd won without him here. The team was 9-7 before he got here and they we 9-7 two times in his three years here.

 

[khiladi]

Hey I wasn't the biggest fan of Garrett's offense last year either and it often bothered me as well. But my problem is that Romo forced that pass into TG in triple coverage, while he had plenty of time, so you're saying that it was just because Romo makes mistakes and TO was standing off out there someone wide open?

That isn't what I saw there. I saw him stand back there, for a few seconds, looking around the field and having NO ONE, including TO, get open and just threw the ball to Terry praying that it would actually wind up in his hands.

The fact that the ball eventually got thrown into such a hopeless situation is a problem from the entire set of WR's not getting open. Which included TO.

I also saw Tony throw 2 INT's in the Steelers game (Which is the one I beleive you're talking about, not the Ravens game) when he was throwing to TO. On one particular one, an out, it was picked off because TO quit running on his route and allowed the defender to just waltz right to the spot and pick it off.

On one of Romos picks by Ed Reed in the Baltimore game it happened when Romo was trying to force the ball down the sidelines toward TO. So, yeah, Romo throws INTs while throwing to other players, without a doubt, he also throws them while trying to force the ball to TO.

Tony Romo had plenty of time to drive the ball. There was a minute left. TO had single coverage on the play and was a better option. TR didnt have to throw it to anybody but run for yardage. The point is, TR has had a problem with forcing the ball. He doesn't just try and force the ball to TO, he does it to every receiver at particular times. How does TO suddenly become the scape-goat for this issue?

Also, TO did not break on the route against he Steelers. I alfready analyzed the play. First of all, TO pointed out to Romo prior to the snap that Polamalu had the coverage. The other DB of the Steelers, unlike in the 49ers game, correcty read the coverage an played deep, taking away the inside of Owens route. The 49er DB just touched TO and let him go buy, and Singletary had already pointed out that they didn't jam TO properly at the line, letting him run by. Further, as soon as one sees TO turn and supposedly break on the ball, Polamalu already had inside position. TO also hesitated in the 49ers route as well, which is a clear indication that hesitation was part of the play. What you claim as breaking on the play was TR actually surprised that the ball was thrown, while he was watching Polamalu right in front of him taking away his positioning.

The Steelers knew exactly what was coming on that play. TO pointed it out to Romo, Polamlua already broke on the route, and their DB took away the inside. It is actually a mark against against Garrett nd his predictability.

The point is, it is Garrett's coaching has not made Romo better, it has contributed to his problems. The whole notion of trying to get big chunks down the fiels has put Romo in a bind to make plays. He has to run around avoiding the rush, wiaiting for plays to develop, which the defense already knows what is coming.

 

[khiladi]

I said that because you, and others, have acted like without him there is NO HOPE of a team winning a championship. We have a couple of guys around here, yourself mostly, who some how thinks that the loss of TO is the absolute end of the world and that now the rest of the offense, and the playmakers they've assembled, are just going to suck because we didn't keep TO.

It's hilarious how someone says TO can't help win a championship and it's "a team game" and we're bullying him but those same people turn around and make the claim that this team is in trouble and can't win cause TO isn't here.

So which is it? Is it a team game or is it a TO game?

TO is almost as relevant to our offensive success as Tony Romo is, but Tony Romo can't win a play-off game by himself. Are we going to get rid of Tony Romo, because he can't win a championship all by himself? That is the argument. It doesn't mean we can't win without TO. I already said it, but nobody can tell me he doesn't give us a better shot at winning. The fact is, people are putting ridiculous standards on TO that even Ware and Romo can't bear.

 

[dbair1967]

Tony Romo had plenty of time to drive the ball. There was a minute left. TO had single coverage on the play and was a better option. TR didnt have to throw it to anybody but run for yardage. The point is, TR has had a problem with forcing the ball. He doesn't just try and force the ball to TO, he does it to every receiver at particular times. How does TO suddenly become the scape-goat for this issue?

Also, TO did not break on the route against he Steelers. I alfready analyzed the play. First of all, TO pointed out to Romo prior to the snap that Polamalu had the coverage. The other DB of the Steelers, unlike in the 49ers game, correcty read the coverage an played deep, taking away the inside of Owens route. The 49er DB just touched TO and let him go buy, and Singletary had already pointed out that they didn't jam TO properly at the line, letting him run by. Further, as soon as one sees TO turn and supposedly break on the ball, Polamalu already had inside position. TO also hesitated in the 49ers route as well, which is a clear indication that hesitation was part of the play.

The Steelers knew exactly what was coming on that play. TO pointed it out to Romo, Polamlua already broke on the route, and their DB took away the inside. It is actually a mark against against Garrett nd his predictability.

The point is, it is Garrett's coaching has not made Romo better, it has contributed to his problems. The whole notion of trying to get big chunks down the fiels has put Romo in a bind to make plays. He has to run around avoiding the rush, wiaiting for plays to develop, which the defense already knows what is coming.

 

[dbair1967]

TO is almost as relevant to our offensive success as Tony Romo is, but Tony Romo can't win a play-off game by himself. Are we going to get rid of Tony Romo, because he can't win a championship all by himself? That is the argument. It doesn't mean we can't win without TO. I already said it, but nobody can tell me he doesn't give us a better shot at winning. The fact is, people are putting ridiculous standards on TO that even Ware and Romo can't bear.

stop it man...your killing me

 

[1fisher]

I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

I'm happy he's gone!

 

[khiladi]

There's always excuses. Always. The only thing that matters in the playoff is did the team win?

TO was out there, he said he was healthy and ready to go, so he was out there. Did they win?

No. I don't care about the excuses. They played, they didn't win, and TO was part of that not winning.

I love how this guy, great as he can be, gets all this credit for being a HUGE part of all the wins but when it comes to the losses there is always an excuse. Well he was hurt, well so and so didn't do this, well so and so didn't do that.


It's only a team game when the argument is beneficial to TO's case. The moment it's not it's not a team game anymore it's everyone except TO's fault.

Bro the guy was, and is, a great WR. He was productive here and I enjoyed watching him and cheered him on. He'll go somewhere else and be productive for them and their fans will love him and hate him.

The bottom line is this team didn't win anymore championships, or playoff games for that matter, with him here as they'd won without him here. The team was 9-7 before he got here and they we 9-7 two times in his three years here.

They were also 13-3 with him, which they never were without him during those 3 years. They wrapped up the division and home field advantage with him. WHat is your point? Like I said, Ware didn't win as well, nor did TR. How come TO is the scape-goat? So if TO wasn't part of the winning, then he surely wasn't all of the reason for the 'losing'. With Romo, we most likely would have one another game and had at least one more shot at the play-offs, despite Garrett's suckiness. So we would have two play-off shots with TO if it weren't for the injury to Romo. Maybe we would have been one and done, but we were still better overall with TO.

 

[khiladi]

You would atcually be more relevant if you try and counter-act the argument instead of retorting like a child with your little smilie faces, which actually reveal you have no argument and are more than irritated by the fact that what I said was right.

 

[fanfromvirginia]

Someone tell me again why TO's release signals an end to TO-related threads?

 

[khiladi]

stop it man...your killing me

And yet, TO is the one to blame for all the offensive woes. He isn't as relevant to winning as TR, but he is relevant to our sucking, right?

Was TO the "I" receiver in Garrett's offense or not?