Pretending I Am the GM

[Shake_Tiller]

1,000 yards and 10 TD's are not going to be made up easily.

A "ground" based offense doesn't thrill me. It's a passing game that makes points, not a running game.

With Romo at QB this will never be a 50/50 ratio team (50% run/50% pass).

These are the most compelling reasons to keep Owens. I surely don't deny them. They give me pause. In the end, I simply thing two things: 1) The distraction has become just too much; especially the clubhouse lawyer act; and 2) Owens is less likely each year to put up those numbers. I thought I saw significant erosion this past year.

 

[Hostile]

1,000 yards and 10 TD's are not going to be made up easily.

A "ground" based offense doesn't thrill me. It's a passing game that makes points, not a running game.

With Romo at QB this will never be a 50/50 ratio team (50% run/50% pass).

I don't want it to be a 50/50 either. I just want to control the clock and move the chains rather than look for quick strikes. That means Witten, Williams and Crayton fit the bill more. I want to throw the ball, but in a manner that eat sup the clock and keeps the Defense fresh to wreak havoc.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I'm still making up my mind about T.O. and his effect on the Cowboys.

Among my objections to releasing him, primarily that he is a blue-chip NFL WR, is he would not hesitate to go to the Skins or Giants and make our lives much worse.

Considering that, I'd rather he be our headache rather than being our headache we'd have to face twice a year in the NFC east.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I'm still making up my mind about T.O. and his effect on the Cowboys.

Among my objections to releasing him, primarily that he is a blue-chip NFL WR, is he would not hesitate to go to the Skins or Giants and make our lives much worse.

Considering that, I'd rather he be our headache rather than being our headache we'd have to face twice a year in the NFC east.

If he goes to either one of those after a year he could be our best asset also.

 

[LatinMind]

I would definitely get rid of Owens. Not because he is a bad player, he isn't. Not by any wild stretch of the imagination.

Not because the fans and media are calling for it. Screw that. Who cares? I don't.

Not because it could drive Garrett or Sherman away. I'm the biggest Garrett shill on the forum. I have a serious agenda for him to be the next Head Coach.

There are three reasons why I would do this. Felix Jones, Marion Barber, and Tashard Choice.

I love ball control Offense. I love to pound the other team to death. I love to see the Defense getting rest while the Offense moves the chains.

Roy can be a #1, Austin #2, Crayton the #3. Witten is the best weapon in the passing attack anyway and Bennett could be utilized more.

The money saved could shore up the O-line which is badly needed. I'd like to spend on Defense so that they can be the attacking disruptive force I want. 59 sacks in 2008 was great, but they gave up too many points, too much yardage and wore down.

The payoff would be less distractions. Sorry Owens fans, but denying he is a distraction is wearing blinders. Guy is one hell of a football player, but he is high maintenance and what this team needs is a new focus. Ball control is the answer.

We'd still have some home run hitters with Roy, Austin and especially Felix.

We might score fewer points, in fact we probably would. But I'd trade that for a more focused, less distracted team that wins more and I think we'd win more in 2009 with Owens gone and a new focus on Offense.

It's just my opinion and you're free to disagree.

me id say romo's bad throws and costly turnovers had more to do with dallas being distracted then actually anything owens did. again, what did he do? mind u, he didnt bring up that secret meeting story. after every game he wasnt saying get me the ball. it was more like, we need to ge better.

dallas can run the ball all they want, umm if im not mistaken owens is fine getting 2 balls if the team wins. as its happened quite a bit since hes been a cowboy. when he gets mad not being involved in a loss, i dont see that being any different then michael irvins tirades. anybody remember when michael irvin was mad when dallas brought in mcknight? owens welcomed roy because he knew the team needed another wr.

too many people issue too much blame owens way. anything that happens espn tries to shoot twards owens. and while alot of cowboy fans say espn is trash, they eat up that "owens propanda".

id say this team has alot of problems and alot of distraction. but i dont know if its owens. maybe romo's dedication? newmans mouth? garretts game planning? jerrys need for airtime? what is owens even doing?

 

[Shake_Tiller]

me id say romo's bad throws and costly turnovers had more to do with dallas being distracted then actually anything owens did. again, what did he do? mind u, he didnt bring up that secret meeting story. after every game he wasnt saying get me the ball. it was more like, we need to ge better.

dallas can run the ball all they want, umm if im not mistaken owens is fine getting 2 balls if the team wins. as its happened quite a bit since hes been a cowboy. when he gets mad not being involved in a loss, i dont see that being any different then michael irvins tirades. anybody remember when michael irvin was mad when dallas brought in mcknight? owens welcomed roy because he knew the team needed another wr.

too many people issue too much blame owens way. anything that happens espn tries to shoot twards owens. and while alot of cowboy fans say espn is trash, they eat up that "owens propanda".

id say this team has alot of problems and alot of distraction. but i dont know if its owens. maybe romo's dedication? newmans mouth? garretts game planning? jerrys need for airtime? what is owens even doing?

I understand what you're saying, but can I offer a couple of arguments?

One, the same media that report Owens' activities report those of Romo. If they are not credible where Owens is concerned, why are they credible regarding Romo's work ethic?

Two, I have said before I think Owens' antics get exaggerated. But I also think it's a cop-out to lay this at ESPN's feet. Writers, broadcasters and ex-players and coaches from a myriad of organizations have labeled Owens a distraction and a "me first" player. When one witness points to the accused, it can be ignored. Two, three, four, five... but virtually every notable football writer has pointed to Owens, as far as I can tell. Certainly, multiple sources... so have broadcasters. So have former players and coaches. In my view, there are too many to explain away, no matter how hard the thing is spun.

 

[jterrell]

I understand what you're saying, but can I offer a couple of arguments?

One, the same media that report Owens' activities report those of Romo. If they are not credible where Owens is concerned, why are they credible regarding Romo's work ethic?

Two, I have said before I think Owens' antics get exaggerated. But I also think it's a cop-out to lay this at ESPN's feet. Writers, broadcasters and ex-players and coaches from a myriad of organizations have labeled Owens a distraction and a "me first" player. When one witness points to the accused, it can be ignored. Two, three, four, five... but virtually every notable football writer has pointed to Owens, as far as I can tell. Certainly, multiple sources... so have broadcasters. So have former players and coaches. In my view, there are too many to explain away, no matter how hard the thing is spun.

2 long-winded points here ... and I am enjoying the way you discuss things btw.


1. I think many point to the fact Romo reports and T.O. reports are BOTH so negative indicate obvious bias against the team and the players specifically. T.O. is not a very likable guy for many but my biggest issue with the media is they are supposed to be professional and above petty sniping at those they cover. Has Werder been? Has Mosley's ESPN blogs not gotten more and more Cowboy bash heavy since Owens called him a chump? How does covering the team turn into bashing players you do not like? It was my pet peeve with Mickey and Quincy Carter. If a guy is a complete and total jerk feel free to write that. Then make every other article simple and to the point about performance or whatever the story is, do not make it turn back each time to the fact the guy is a jerk and the guy being the jerk is the entire basis of your article and the vast majority of the entirety of your work product. Once upon a time only Skip Bayless did this. Now it seems widespread. That frustrates me a great deal because there are many others who would do a better job in that role and many who do now with their own blogs. Guys like Bob Sturm who is a Packers fan or Albert Breer who is a Pat homer provide/d better Cowboys coverage because they actually wrote about football stuff and did not get caught up in National Enquirer nonsense just to insult players they didn't like.

2. Deion was a me-first guy. So is Brett Favre. There are a lot of them and it gets allowed for some but amazingly not for others. It is all about perception. A fan has to be able to ignore public perception and look at things honestly.
It is hilarious to me that fans of other teams are usually more fair to our players than we are. Most other teams fans might take a shot or two at Romo but admit he is a great player. Our own fans are ready to cut his throat and want to "push him in camp"... (lol btw at that thought... pushing a guy making a zillion dollars with a backup at his position). And the root of that is simple. Negative perception pushed off by media members with an axe to grind and fed by angered fans who provide them plenty of ammo on talk shows and in print. Irvin was probably a worse human being then T.O. Irvin did actually stab someone and he did break several laws in some form. He did commit adultery and other acts that are generally considered failures. But Mike has charisma and likability. That buys him a lot with the media and by extension the fan base. T.O. he is not overly likable so when you see him at a press conference you think immediately that he is a jerk. But it is just perception. T.O. has been a good off the field guy, he is a tireless worker in the off-season, he returns from injury quickly, he plays at the same speed he runs his mouth at and he is emotional in both good and bad situations not just in the bad.

 

[sonnyboy]

I honestly don't care who we replace him with as long as that guy puts team first.

Look, Owens is an enigma. I said it before, I don't dislike the guy. I have even spoken to him on the phone and I can get a message to him any time I need to.

Is he talented? Absolutely.

One of the best in the NFL? No doubt about it.

Even at his age? His age does not matter.

Does he work hard? Harder than anyone.

Does he think that working harder means he has entitlement? I think so.

Does he have entitlement? No. No one does. You still have to buy into the team concept.

He honestly believes what he says has no effect on this team. That in and of itself is a problem.

Does he create the problem or does the media create it for him? Both. Which is exactly why I have said in this thread several times that I am willing to keep him if he will just shut up. If he doesn't shut up, I would really rather let him go. I lose a source for some info. I'd rather win. I think he is very much a symptom of the losing. He doesn't cause losses but the added drama contributes to it.

NFL experts such as Jimmy Johnson, Cris Carter, Jeff Fisher, Tom Jackson, Terry Bradshaw, Howie Long, Randy White, Cliff Harris, and Darren Woodson have agreed with me on this in recent weeks. Distractions in the locker room cause a lack of focus which leads to losses.

The only way we will win with this guy is if he realizes the media are not ever going to be on his side, are in fact his enemy, and he simply does what he does best, play football. He'll never get there. The guy honestly believes that because he is a good person at heart (and he honestly is) that he will finally catch a break.

Not gonna happen. Every word he says will be scrutinized and they will read between every line looking for a way in which he is once again, Team Obliterator. His talking makes Skip Bayless look smart. Skip Freaking Bayless. No one should make that abomination look smart. The only way to stop him...shut up.

Hard to argue with the points you make here HOS.

But let me ask a few questions:

What was the difference between the 2007 Owens and 2008 Owens?
If we could win 13 games and the #1 seed with Owens in 2007, why not 2009?
How would you compare and contrast Owens and Burress?

If the 2007 Giants could win the 2007 SB, with a modest roster (including Burress) and a team first attitude, why can't the Cowboys do it with Owens in 2009?

I believe if you honestly tackle these questions, you'll realize a few things:

That this team's problem is not Owens.
That releasing one of it's best players, will not help the Cowboys.
That this team's problems had nothing to do with any of the players on the roster. Owens, P Jones, T. Johnson.

This team's problems are the result of the approach and philosophy of its management and coaching staff.

The team simply needs more discipline and a tougher practice schedule/routine. This must come from the powers that be.

Releasing Owens does not solve this problem.

 

[sonnyboy]

2 long-winded points here ... and I am enjoying the way you discuss things btw.


1. I think many point to the fact Romo reports and T.O. reports are BOTH so negative indicate obvious bias against the team and the players specifically. T.O. is not a very likable guy for many but my biggest issue with the media is they are supposed to be professional and above petty sniping at those they cover. Has Werder been? Has Mosley's ESPN blogs not gotten more and more Cowboy bash heavy since Owens called him a chump? How does covering the team turn into bashing players you do not like? It was my pet peeve with Mickey and Quincy Carter. If a guy is a complete and total jerk feel free to write that. Then make every other article simple and to the point about performance or whatever the story is, do not make it turn back each time to the fact the guy is a jerk and the guy being the jerk is the entire basis of your article and the vast majority of the entirety of your work product. Once upon a time only Skip Bayless did this. Now it seems widespread. That frustrates me a great deal because there are many others who would do a better job in that role and many who do now with their own blogs. Guys like Bob Sturm who is a Packers fan or Albert Breer who is a Pat homer provide/d better Cowboys coverage because they actually wrote about football stuff and did not get caught up in National Enquirer nonsense just to insult players they didn't like.

2. Deion was a me-first guy. So is Brett Favre. There are a lot of them and it gets allowed for some but amazingly not for others. It is all about perception. A fan has to be able to ignore public perception and look at things honestly.
It is hilarious to me that fans of other teams are usually more fair to our players than we are. Most other teams fans might take a shot or two at Romo but admit he is a great player. Our own fans are ready to cut his throat and want to "push him in camp"... (lol btw at that thought... pushing a guy making a zillion dollars with a backup at his position). And the root of that is simple. Negative perception pushed off by media members with an axe to grind and fed by angered fans who provide them plenty of ammo on talk shows and in print. Irvin was probably a worse human being then T.O. Irvin did actually stab someone and he did break several laws in some form. He did commit adultery and other acts that are generally considered failures. But Mike has charisma and likability. That buys him a lot with the media and by extension the fan base. T.O. he is not overly likable so when you see him at a press conference you think immediately that he is a jerk. But it is just perception. T.O. has been a good off the field guy, he is a tireless worker in the off-season, he returns from injury quickly, he plays at the same speed he runs his mouth at and he is emotional in both good and bad situations not just in the bad.

Great post. And its true. BTW you forgot about Irvin's drug use and drug arrest.
But Irvin's a life long Cowboy. He never played for the opposition, stood on the star to try to humiliate the Cowboys.

Owens is and probably will always be viewed by most as a mercinary.

If he plays a couple more years, wins a SB, and ultimately goes into the HOF as a Cowboy, that will change the minds of many Cowboy fans.

Short of that, he'll never have much benefit of the doubt collateral.

 

[khiladi]

He struggled to beat jams in 2008. No window dressing changes that. One game doesn't prove otherwise. Patrick Crayton beat the Commanders a few years ago running a 9, but that doesn't make him a deep threat. As to this notion that teams wouldn't double him if he had lost a step... of course they would, unless another Cowboys WR were considered a bigger threat. Even if a defense dogs, it has six defenders to cover five eligible receivers. Someone gets doubled, absent there being at least six rushers. And even then, in most cases, an offense keeps in someone to block... a TE or a back. I don't deny Owens was the Cowboys' most dangerous WR. He isn't elite anymore on a league level.

Not true... Owens beat jams this year, he didn't beat double-coverage over the top. The only team to even try and single-cover him with no help over th top were the 49ers and he absolutely smoked them. It wasn't like a simple 9 that Crayton ran, it was one of TOs best performances in terms of yardage ver...Further, your argument is that teams simply doubled TO, because it was a matter of 5 eligible receivers to six defenders, which again is absurd. They could double any receiver then, which they clearly weren't doing. This also necessitates that Roy Williams was getting single coverage, and he didn't beat anybody.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

2 long-winded points here ... and I am enjoying the way you discuss things btw.


1. I think many point to the fact Romo reports and T.O. reports are BOTH so negative indicate obvious bias against the team and the players specifically. T.O. is not a very likable guy for many but my biggest issue with the media is they are supposed to be professional and above petty sniping at those they cover. Has Werder been? Has Mosley's ESPN blogs not gotten more and more Cowboy bash heavy since Owens called him a chump? How does covering the team turn into bashing players you do not like? It was my pet peeve with Mickey and Quincy Carter. If a guy is a complete and total jerk feel free to write that. Then make every other article simple and to the point about performance or whatever the story is, do not make it turn back each time to the fact the guy is a jerk and the guy being the jerk is the entire basis of your article and the vast majority of the entirety of your work product. Once upon a time only Skip Bayless did this. Now it seems widespread. That frustrates me a great deal because there are many others who would do a better job in that role and many who do now with their own blogs. Guys like Bob Sturm who is a Packers fan or Albert Breer who is a Pat homer provide/d better Cowboys coverage because they actually wrote about football stuff and did not get caught up in National Enquirer nonsense just to insult players they didn't like.

2. Deion was a me-first guy. So is Brett Favre. There are a lot of them and it gets allowed for some but amazingly not for others. It is all about perception. A fan has to be able to ignore public perception and look at things honestly.
It is hilarious to me that fans of other teams are usually more fair to our players than we are. Most other teams fans might take a shot or two at Romo but admit he is a great player. Our own fans are ready to cut his throat and want to "push him in camp"... (lol btw at that thought... pushing a guy making a zillion dollars with a backup at his position). And the root of that is simple. Negative perception pushed off by media members with an axe to grind and fed by angered fans who provide them plenty of ammo on talk shows and in print. Irvin was probably a worse human being then T.O. Irvin did actually stab someone and he did break several laws in some form. He did commit adultery and other acts that are generally considered failures. But Mike has charisma and likability. That buys him a lot with the media and by extension the fan base. T.O. he is not overly likable so when you see him at a press conference you think immediately that he is a jerk. But it is just perception. T.O. has been a good off the field guy, he is a tireless worker in the off-season, he returns from injury quickly, he plays at the same speed he runs his mouth at and he is emotional in both good and bad situations not just in the bad.

I don't take issue with anything you've written. Now, I don't think every writer has a vendetta against Owens, but you didn't say that. I'm merely pointing out to note that part of my thoughts are based on the widespread reports concerning Owens. There seems to be a perception among some that one or two reporters are driving the debate. Having said that, though, again, I've said and continue to say that some of the criticism of Owens seems to me unfair. And there is absolutely no doubt there is a double standard. Favre is a great example. You are dead on point and correct.

Here's where I come down: A pro football team has one function, to the fan. We want the team to win. The owner wants it to make money, but we want it to win. Sure, we'd also love to think the players are great guys and good role models. But it's pro football. We want to win.

Owens draws massive negative attention, regardless of how much he is at fault. In my view, he is a major distraction. On one level, I don't care who is at fault. I don't mean that to sound callous. But the function of the team is to win. Owens is on his third team, and this one was the only one that truly wanted him. There was little or no bidding war. At the time of his two prior moves, he was a better, younger, faster player. But the teams decided they would function better without his services. Jerry Jones, from an NFL perspective, is a distinct minority in thinking Owens, on balance, brings enough to the table to offset the negatives. That seems to be an almost unassailable point. What Werder or King or Burwell or Curran or Mortenson or Clayton or Galloway or whoever might write and say means something... it does mean something. But the actions of NFL teams are even more compelling.

Three things I think:

Fault, in this case, isn't the issue. There is a major distraction.

The broad stream of NFL opinion places Owens in a negative light, or at least in a "minus outweighs plus" light.

Owens is a declining player.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Not true... Owens beat jams this year, he didn't beat double-coverage over the top. The only team to even try and single-cover him with no help over th top were the 49ers and he absolutely smoked them. It wasn't like a simple 9 that Crayton ran, it was one of TOs best performances in terms of yardage ver...Further, your argument is that teams simply doubled TO, because it was a matter of 5 eligible receivers to six defenders, which again is absurd. They could double any receiver then, which they clearly weren't doing. This also necessitates that Roy Williams was getting single coverage, and he didn't beat anybody.

No argument on Williams. And yes, my Crayton comparison was a little lame. I will concede that. But I won't concede the double team point. Every team will have a receiver who gets the balance of the double teams. Owens was the logical Dallas receiver. Witten got teamed as well, but in the manner TEs are doubled, which is different than what teams do with wideouts.

And Owens struggled to beat the jams. That I can see with my eyes.

 

[khiladi]

Good point... one I had forgotten. Singletary took a lot of heat for that.

He took heat because he didn't double Owens. He didn't take heat because of failing to press TO.""Even the pass he caught over Nate Clements' head, there should have been help over there," Singletary said. "It wasn't just Nate. You have a post safety who needs to get over there and help, and he should've been sacked in the backfield for a loss." As far as physicality, he had this to say:"I don't think there's any other team this year, or maybe in the last couple of years, that played Dallas more physically (and) more sound than we did." He also said the following:Asked why the 49ers didn't double-cover Owens Sunday, Singletary said they didn't feel it was necessary. He said other teams effectively have jammed Owens at the line of scrimmage and thrown his timing off. Before Owens' 213-yard outburst against the 49ers, his best game this season was an 89-yard performance in Week 2 against Philadelphia.The 49ers planned to borrow the same game plan every other defense had used. On some plays, however, the Cowboys moved Owens inside to the slot receiver position, where the 49ers didn't have as many opportunities to slow him down at the line of scrimmage. On others, such as the one against Roman, the 49ers were thwarted by a weak effort."One guy just kind of reached out and rather than knocking the snot out of him, he just kind of touched him," Singletary said. "And (Owens) ran up the field and Mark Roman was chasing him after that."Notice how he said, even when they pressed him, they failed, because they didn't hit him hard enough. Guess what? You hit player's hard enough at the line of scrimmage, your most likely going to be successful as a corner.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Not true... Owens beat jams this year, he didn't beat double-coverage over the top. The only team to even try and single-cover him with no help over th top were the 49ers and he absolutely smoked them. It wasn't like a simple 9 that Crayton ran, it was one of TOs best performances in terms of yardage ver...Further, your argument is that teams simply doubled TO, because it was a matter of 5 eligible receivers to six defenders, which again is absurd. They could double any receiver then, which they clearly weren't doing. This also necessitates that Roy Williams was getting single coverage, and he didn't beat anybody.

Just to be clear, I think Owens was the Cowboys' best wideout. No doubt. But I contend him being doubled is not evidence of his being elite. He is no longer elite. Again, that I can see with my eyeballs.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

He took heat because he didn't double Owens. He didn't take heat because of failing to press TO.""Even the pass he caught over Nate Clements' head, there should have been help over there," Singletary said. "It wasn't just Nate. You have a post safety who needs to get over there and help, and he should've been sacked in the backfield for a loss." As far as physicality, he had this to say:"I don't think there's any other team this year, or maybe in the last couple of years, that played Dallas more physically (and) more sound than we did." He also said the following:Asked why the 49ers didn't double-cover Owens Sunday, Singletary said they didn't feel it was necessary. He said other teams effectively have jammed Owens at the line of scrimmage and thrown his timing off. Before Owens' 213-yard outburst against the 49ers, his best game this season was an 89-yard performance in Week 2 against Philadelphia.The 49ers planned to borrow the same game plan every other defense had used. On some plays, however, the Cowboys moved Owens inside to the slot receiver position, where the 49ers didn't have as many opportunities to slow him down at the line of scrimmage. On others, such as the one against Roman, the 49ers were thwarted by a weak effort."One guy just kind of reached out and rather than knocking the snot out of him, he just kind of touched him," Singletary said. "And (Owens) ran up the field and Mark Roman was chasing him after that."Notice how he said, even when they pressed him, they failed, because they didn't hit him hard enough. Guess what? You hit player's hard enough at the line of scrimmage, your most likely going to be successful as a corner.

Go watch that game.

 

[khiladi]

Singeltary acknowledges that they didn't double him like other teams, and that was the butt of the criticism. They also said that teams press TO at the line of scrimmage. The difference is, teams press and double TO, and when Singletary tried it without help over the top, they got smoked.

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Singeltary acknowledges that they didn't double him like other teams, and that was the butt of the criticism. They also said that teams press TO at the line of scrimmage. The difference is, teams press and double TO, and when Singletary tried it without help over the top, they got smoked.

I understand what you're saying about the single coverage. But for some inexplicable reason, the corner didn't press. Look, I still think Owens beats single coverage a good deal of the time he sees it. But less often than usual. Beyond that, he drops too many passes and runs too many terrible routes. He no longer has the supreme physical gifts to overcome those negatives to the point he is elite. He is still good. He is a declining player and no longer a great player.

It's just my opinion, not gospel.

 

[khiladi]

Go watch that game.

So I give you quotes from Singeltary that stated he beat us when his cornerback tired to press him and you tell me to watch the game?

 

[Shake_Tiller]

Singeltary acknowledges that they didn't double him like other teams, and that was the butt of the criticism. They also said that teams press TO at the line of scrimmage. The difference is, teams press and double TO, and when Singletary tried it without help over the top, they got smoked.

I am sorry to be so long winded. One more thing. The term "double coverage" is used far too glibly. Often a safety over the top is positioned in such a way as to deal with a particular threat. But he is not in pure double coverage. Owens drew a lot of attention, but having a safety over the top isn't pure double coverage, and the best wideouts beat that coverage more often than not.

 

[khiladi]

I understand what you're saying about the single coverage. But for some inexplicable reason, the corner didn't press. Look, I still think Owens beats single coverage a good deal of the time he sees it. But less often than usual. Beyond that, he drops too many passes and runs too many terrible routes. He no longer has the supreme physical gifts to overcome those negatives to the point he is elite. He is still good. He is a declining player and no longer a great player.


It's just my opinion, not gospel.

Wittne fumbles the ball... TO wasn't even near the league-leader in drops this year and plenty of his catches were flat-out ridiculous this year. And how does a guy that has been running the West Coast offense successfully for years, run bad routes? Seems like people by the hype. Roy Williams looked like a scrub WR this year, and Crayton looked far below average this year. I didn't see RW complaing about an injury, I saw him complaining about not getting the ball, and when he did get the ball, he was yelling to the sidelines to get him the ball.Funny thing is, when RW came on board, everybody who hated TO was all about how we just need to throw the ball to RW, because he made some spectacular grabs and was sure-handed. Funny how they turned coat at the end of the year and started saying he couldn't run routes. Talk about indecisive....