Recommended Photo: Romo INT from all 22

[theogt]

Murray is open with a huge window with little risk (tipped ball). And a lot of room to run around in. You're looking at that pic and I'm looking at the entire situation. Garrett says its the right play to go to Murray. I'll take his opinion over anyone else. Esp since one of those 2 or 3 things did go bad. Getting your foot stepped on yada is part of every pass play.

Your point in this post seems to be that Murray is "more open" than Escobar, which is very different from saying that Escobar is not open.

Garrett said that without having the benefit of watching the All 22 and replays. My initial reaction from the live game was that it was a mistake and that he should have dumped it off as well. Now I have the benefit of seeing what Tony saw and knowing exactly how the play developed -- and I can now tell my initial assessment was wrong, just like Garrett was wrong in his initial assessment.

 

[WV Cowboy]

If you watch the play again, Murray actually sits down in the soft zone and waits for the pass that does not come but, before he sits down in the zone, he is actually looking back at Romo and running slightly diagonally, towards the Flag/Sideline. If Tony decides to go to Murray, the Ball is probably thrown earlier, Smith is never an issue and the throwing lane is there.

I see that now, ... if Romo throws it early enough to Murray, even though he would have still gotten his foot stepped on, that type of pass would have been more of a flick of the wrist for Tony and not impacted as much, .. and it would have been a successful play.

Doesn't appear Tony ever thought about going to Murray though, does it?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I see that now, ... if Romo throws it early enough to Murray, even though he would have still gotten his foot stepped on, that type of pass would have been more of a flick of the wrist for Tony and not impacted as much, .. and it would have been a successful play.

Doesn't appear Tony ever thought about going to Murray though, does it?

No, I think Tony probably looked to his right the whole way. Witten was on that side of the field and so was Escobar. Witten came open later but he probably saw the window for Escobar and made the throw. I don't think he ever had any intentions of going to Murray but he should have IMO.

What's interesting is the slot WR to the left of the formation. We have an outside WR, a slot WR and Escobar to the left of the formation. The outside WR runs a sideline pattern, Escobar runs a 5 yard drag pattern. Two things are interesting here. One, if Escobar snaps that pattern off and runs it correctly, then he's tackled on or about the 21. As has been discussed, that route needs to be a square in on the break and if it is, then look at where he actually should be on the field. Makes me wonder if we are correct about the sloppy route and if it was never supposed to be a square in. The route he ran makes more sense because it gains more yards. None of the routes look like they were designed to be stop routes. They all look as if they were designed to allow the Receivers to run to daylight. He may have run the route correctly. However, and this, to me, is more interesting. Look at the Slot WR to the left of the formation. He runs a kind of post route. He avoids the jam and is actually by the DB who is covering him well before the ball leaves Romo's hands. If Romo sees him, that's probably 6 because he's already beyond the Safety to his side and almost even with the Safety to the opposite side of the field with the angle. If Romo decides to go to that side of the field, his footwork is completely different and he doesn't push of from his left foot at an angle. He probably steps up and and pushes off with his right foot and again, Smith does not come into play. It's really interesting to watch this play unfold. Was actually a very well designed play.

 

[Staubacher]

I agree with that and have said so. Not the same situation there than earlier. I'm not even that critical of Tony for the throw. If the OL protects better then Tony can move around and extend the play. If the receiver runs a better route the ball is completed. If Tony's throw isn't altered by his own teammate he likely makes the throw. Not arguing he had completed tighter passes than that all day. Not saying it was a terrible decision to throw to that window. Not arguing any of that. Just going from the thread flow of the proper read which was to Murray. Get your positive yards and go to the next down.

Tony needs to be congratulated for having an historic game. We are all privileged to have seen one of the greatest performances in history.

I'm moving on to the Skins. I've said more than enough here. You guys can have the last word.

I'm with ya bro - let's get the Skins!

 

[blindzebra]

No, I think Tony probably looked to his right the whole way. Witten was on that side of the field and so was Escobar. Witten came open later but he probably saw the window for Escobar and made the throw. I don't think he ever had any intentions of going to Murray but he should have IMO.

What's interesting is the slot WR to the left of the formation. We have an outside WR, a slot WR and Escobar to the left of the formation. The outside WR runs a sideline pattern, Escobar runs a 5 yard drag pattern. Two things are interesting here. One, if Escobar snaps that pattern off and runs it correctly, then he's tackled on or about the 21. As has been discussed, that route needs to be a square in on the break and if it is, then look at where he actually should be on the field. Makes me wonder if we are correct about the sloppy route and if it was never supposed to be a square in. The route he ran makes more sense because it gains more yards. None of the routes look like they were designed to be stop routes. They all look as if they were designed to allow the Receivers to run to daylight. He may have run the route correctly. However, and this, to me, is more interesting. Look at the Slot WR to the left of the formation. He runs a kind of post route. He avoids the jam and is actually by the DB who is covering him well before the ball leaves Romo's hands. If Romo sees him, that's probably 6 because he's already beyond the Safety to his side and almost even with the Safety to the opposite side of the field with the angle. If Romo decides to go to that side of the field, his footwork is completely different and he doesn't push of from his left foot at an angle. He probably steps up and and pushes off with his right foot and again, Smith does not come into play. It's really interesting to watch this play unfold. Was actually a very well designed play.

Murray looks open but no way Romo can see him. He does not clear the DT/Frederick/Leary until Tony begins the throw to Escobar.

LOL people are complaining about him throwing into a tight window and you want him throwing over the CB and between two safeties.

It was the correct read with a domino effect of factors...stepped on foot, forced higher release point, illegal contact uncalled and a nice play on the ball...none of which were Romo's fault.

 

[dboyz]

No, I think Tony probably looked to his right the whole way. Witten was on that side of the field and so was Escobar. Witten came open later but he probably saw the window for Escobar and made the throw. I don't think he ever had any intentions of going to Murray but he should have IMO.

What's interesting is the slot WR to the left of the formation. We have an outside WR, a slot WR and Escobar to the left of the formation. The outside WR runs a sideline pattern, Escobar runs a 5 yard drag pattern. Two things are interesting here. One, if Escobar snaps that pattern off and runs it correctly, then he's tackled on or about the 21. As has been discussed, that route needs to be a square in on the break and if it is, then look at where he actually should be on the field. Makes me wonder if we are correct about the sloppy route and if it was never supposed to be a square in. The route he ran makes more sense because it gains more yards. None of the routes look like they were designed to be stop routes. They all look as if they were designed to allow the Receivers to run to daylight. He may have run the route correctly. However, and this, to me, is more interesting. Look at the Slot WR to the left of the formation. He runs a kind of post route. He avoids the jam and is actually by the DB who is covering him well before the ball leaves Romo's hands. If Romo sees him, that's probably 6 because he's already beyond the Safety to his side and almost even with the Safety to the opposite side of the field with the angle. If Romo decides to go to that side of the field, his footwork is completely different and he doesn't push of from his left foot at an angle. He probably steps up and and pushes off with his right foot and again, Smith does not come into play. It's really interesting to watch this play unfold. Was actually a very well designed play.

Both Romo and Garrett described it as a seam route, which too makes me wonder whether or not Escobar indeed was supposed to carry it up the field as he did. Or,perhaps because there was a safety over the top, he was supposed to break it off sharply as everyone seems to think he should have done.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Murray looks open but no way Romo can see him. He does not clear the DT/Frederick/Leary until Tony begins the throw to Escobar.

LOL people are complaining about him throwing into a tight window and you want him throwing over the CB and between two safeties.

It was the correct read with a domino effect of factors...stepped on foot, forced higher release point, illegal contact uncalled and a nice play on the ball...none of which were Romo's fault.

Murray is open. I don't understand why you think Romo can not see him? I can't see why Romo's view would be obstructed to the point where he could not see Murray. He picks up Escobar right at about the time Escobar makes his cut. You can see this by how Romo steps up into the pocket and looks him down the entire way. Murray is right in his line of vision at that point and I don't see how anybody, from the view of this clip, can determine what Romo can or can not see there. It's just my opinion but if Romo can see Escobar coming out of his break and I think he can, then he has to be able to see Murray as well.

On the comment about the DB and the two Safeties, I don't understand what that is referring to exactly.

On the last comment, well, I don't agree. That's fine, we don't have to agree but I'd bet money that if Romo had to do that play over again, he would absolutely do it different. May never know though.

 

[Doomsday]

Too bad the blocking broke down on that play, who ever was in the slot at the top of the screen ended up wide open for a possible TD.

 

[JPostSam]

i can't watch that play -- in video or in that series of stills -- without screaming, "DUMP IT OFF TO MURRAY!"

 

[BAT]

No, I think Tony probably looked to his right the whole way. Witten was on that side of the field and so was Escobar. Witten came open later but he probably saw the window for Escobar and made the throw. I don't think he ever had any intentions of going to Murray but he should have IMO.

What's interesting is the slot WR to the left of the formation. We have an outside WR, a slot WR and Escobar to the left of the formation. The outside WR runs a sideline pattern, Escobar runs a 5 yard drag pattern. Two things are interesting here. One, if Escobar snaps that pattern off and runs it correctly, then he's tackled on or about the 21. As has been discussed, that route needs to be a square in on the break and if it is, then look at where he actually should be on the field. Makes me wonder if we are correct about the sloppy route and if it was never supposed to be a square in. The route he ran makes more sense because it gains more yards. None of the routes look like they were designed to be stop routes. They all look as if they were designed to allow the Receivers to run to daylight. He may have run the route correctly. However, and this, to me, is more interesting. Look at the Slot WR to the left of the formation. He runs a kind of post route. He avoids the jam and is actually by the DB who is covering him well before the ball leaves Romo's hands. If Romo sees him, that's probably 6 because he's already beyond the Safety to his side and almost even with the Safety to the opposite side of the field with the angle. If Romo decides to go to that side of the field, his footwork is completely different and he doesn't push of from his left foot at an angle. He probably steps up and and pushes off with his right foot and again, Smith does not come into play. It's really interesting to watch this play unfold. Was actually a very well designed play.

Escobar himself admitted that he did not flatten his route.

http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.co...iving-romo-better-target-on-interception.html

 

[Ring Leader]

Murray is open with a huge window with little risk (tipped ball). And a lot of room to run around in. You're looking at that pic and I'm looking at the entire situation. Garrett says its the right play to go to Murray. I'll take his opinion over anyone else. Esp since one of those 2 or 3 things did go bad. Getting your foot stepped on yada is part of every pass play.

Getting you foot stepped on, or even getting tripped by your own O lineman (which is what "really" happened) in the throwing motion is "hardly" part of every pass play. I can't even remember the last time I saw it happen to Romo. You're both trivializing and distorting the facts because they don't fit your argument. But by all means, yada yada, carry on.

 

[jobberone]

Getting you foot stepped on, or even getting tripped by your own O lineman (which is what "really" happened) in the throwing motion is "hardly" part of every pass play. I can't even remember the last time I saw it happen to Romo. You're both trivializing and distorting the facts because they don't fit your argument. But by all means, yada yada, carry on.

That's not what I said. The point was things happen during passing plays. You can't dismiss things like receivers failing down/slipping, being held etc, passed getting tipped. Those posts were to another member about specific things said in our debate. So you're not taking them in content. Of course every pass doesn't involve QBs being stepped on causing an errant pass. I'm not trivializing or distorting things at all. Read all my posts in the thread and try to actually try to understand what I'm saying instead of having an agenda of your own.

 

[Ring Leader]

That's not what I said. The point was things happen during passing plays. You can't dismiss things like receivers failing down/slipping, being held etc, passed getting tipped. Those posts were to another member about specific things said in our debate. So you're not taking them in content. Of course every pass doesn't involve QBs being stepped on causing an errant pass. I'm not trivializing or distorting things at all. Read all my posts in the thread and try to actually try to understand what I'm saying instead of having an agenda of your own.

I agree with you that many things can, do and unfortunately did happen - none of which made the pass to Escobar a bad decision, just an unfortunate result.

 

[dfense]

A few things are clear.

1. Escobar wasn't triple covered. He really wasn't even double covered

2. But, Murray was wide open

3. Great play by the Denver defender

4. Our defense still sucks.





YR

I don't think Romo could see Murray. 3 or 4 lineman were between them.

 

[Venger]

The Denver LB ran the router sharper than Escobar. Protection was not good on that play - no excuse to give up pressure to a 3 man rush, no excuse to even let the pocket buckle. I know we don't like pressure throws, but at 2nd and 16 and in danger of making it 3rd and 22, I know why Romo makes a throw there.

 

[jobberone]

I agree with you that many things can, do and unfortunately did happen - none of which made the pass to Escobar a bad decision, just an unfortunate result.

I've never said once in this thread or another it was a bad decision. It was more risky than to Murray and wasn't worth the risk compared to the pass to Murray. There was no reason to go to Escobar under those circumstances.

Water under the bridge now. Beat the Commanders.

 

[DallasDW00ds0n]

ughhh Murray is so opennn

 

[ConstantReboot]

You're assuming a timeout can be wasted. But if we get to their 37 and don't have a timeout to stop the clock and time runs out before we can kick a FG or they have to hurry so much he misses it then Jason Garrett is a total fool and for good reason. We had a timeout in the form of the two minute clock. Romo just has to NOT turn the ball over. Sure he made a ton of tight passes before that. But there are three things that can happen when you pass and two of them are bad and one is a game ender at that end of the field with that team that game. It's just like Garrett said. Murray was the guy to go to and ABQ is right. Romo knows the minute he sees three down linemen with no blitz and deep coverage that Murray is the guy to get the ball unless there is a breakdown in coverage somehow. Or just throw the ball away if necessary. Instead he tried to make a riskier pass and the law of averages finally caught up to him. Having receivers fall down, your pass messed up with a tip, or having your foot stepped on causing an errant pass is part of the equation for INTs and failed passes.

The goal there was to eat the clock up and score near the end of the game without turning the ball over and the secondary goal was to get to overtime without allowing Denver to score. I'd rather punt the ball and hope they turn it over than to give them the ball on my side of the field.

Not assuming a timeout is wasted. Calling a timeout at that time would have been productive and not wasteful. Best time to call a timeout is when your deep in enemy territory after a sack. Besides we had all our timeouts plus the 2 minute warning. As far as eating the clock - well Garrett should have and could have ran the ball on 1st time if you wanted to eat the clock. But NO. Garrett failed during crunchtime like he failed in many close games in the past.

 

[Cebrin]

Oh, I've never heard anyone say that, .. yesterday all I kept reading here was that Escobar was triple -teamed.

But when he starts his cut at the 23, he leaves the LB behind him. If he stays on the 23 he may have caught it and he may not have, .. but I don't think it gets picked.

I agree with you. You can clearly see where Tony threw the ball was in expectation of him running to the right, not up field. I'm honestly not sure what Escobar was thinking? Escobar didn't run his route correctly if you ask me. Nice play by the defender nevertheless.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Escobar himself admitted that he did not flatten his route.

http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.co...iving-romo-better-target-on-interception.html

Fair enough.