***Rip on Romo Thread***

[tupperware]

What's absurd about it? I agree that Bleacher Report is 90% worthless. These are far better, and make sense.

It basically details what would've happened time-wise if we'd just not turned the ball over. If I quote enough of it to detail his argument, it will just auto-link anyway.

I already did this more or less in a similar way. Let me find the post and I'll link it.

 

[JoeCorrado]

This is getting old...quick. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out. I'm not saying to bench him or even trade or release him. I AM saying we should start figuring out who our next QB is now. Either through the draft, free agency or maybe "he" is already on our roster.
My point is that Romo, is just not that guy.

Did we really need a new thread just so that you could continue to rip on Romo?

Mods, can we start to merge these things? Really.

 

[iceberg]

Did we really need a new thread just so that you could continue to rip on Romo?

Mods, can we start to merge these things? Really.

i honestly wonder if these people just like to see their name in lights when starting a thread.

i really can't remember the last time i started one but now i'll go look out of curiosity.

nah.

 

[Mansta54]

Can we cut you?


Hos, can we cut this guy? It's getting out of control.

:laugh2:

 

[btcutter]

I know most people don't actually click on links and read, but these explain it pretty well.[/QUOTE]

Consider this: if you run the ball three times for no gain, and then punt, that should eat up 3 minutes of the clock. If Detroit needs 4 scores to catch you, that means you will have a minimum of 4 possessions. If you run 3 times on all 4 possessions and fail to complete even one first down, that is 12 minutes gone from the clock. That would leave Detroit with 14 minutes to score 4 times.

I think this was the important part of the article. Shorten this game with that type of lead!

 

[tupperware]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4159644&postcount=23

 

[UVAwahoos]

Here are a couple of articles that I wish others would read, too.

http://thelandryhat.com/2011/10/03/dont-blame-romo-for-the-loss-to-detroit/

http://thelandryhat.com/2011/10/04/dont-blame-romo-update/#more-9910

I know most people don't actually click on links and read, but these explain it pretty well.

I love this little excerpt, particularly because Romo is taking all the heat for Garrett's incompetence:

"I have always assumed that Garrett was a sagacious and erudite football scholar. But, now I am starting to consider that maybe that fancy Ivy League education isn’t all it is cracked up to be. His aptitude appears to be less than stellar: he read my article and still remains oblivious to the fact that he could have won by simply running out the clock and punting.

I have loads of forgiveness for people who make mistakes and attempt to learn from them, but Garrett’s comments suggest that he is not yet cognizant of the errors he made.


It also raises questions about who the real gunslinger is. Is it Romo or Garrett?"

 

[Zman5]

We should all pitch in and get JG a time calculator for Xmas.

 

[UVAwahoos]

I know most people don't actually click on links and read, but these explain it pretty well.

Consider this: if you run the ball three times for no gain, and then punt, that should eat up 3 minutes of the clock. If Detroit needs 4 scores to catch you, that means you will have a minimum of 4 possessions. If you run 3 times on all 4 possessions and fail to complete even one first down, that is 12 minutes gone from the clock. That would leave Detroit with 14 minutes to score 4 times.

I think this was the important part of the article. Shorten this game with that type of lead![/quote]


Well...that's just as important as the quote from Ginger:

"with 25 minutes left to go in the game you don’t want to say, ‘Let’s just run it three times and punt It.’"



Which is telling bc it seems as though he is too stubborn to learn from his clear mistakes. If armchair OCs can do the math and see what run, run, run, punt would lead to, than I am not sure why a guy who is making millions to be a professional coach can't understand it. I think it's great though that we have to overcome our own OC's decisions to win games in Dallas.

 

[Stautner]

The only rule we needed to adhere to was not to turn the ball over, and if you do, at least give your defense a chance to stop them from scoring. We failed to do both.

You don't stop passing, but you need to protect the ball, even if it means taking a sack and punting.

I agree with this completely. Maybe Garrett could have made a point of calling Romo aside and giving him a speech on this topic before we went back on the field, but a QB has to have his head about him. That as much or more than physical talent, is what separates great QB's from godo or average ones.

What's absurd about it? I agree that Bleacher Report is 90% worthless. These are far better, and make sense.

It basically details what would've happened time-wise if we'd just not turned the ball over. If I quote enough of it to detail his argument, it will just auto-link anyway.

You can't detail what WOULD have happened time wise, you can only speculate how it may have reasonably played out. Any such scenario is dependent on a lot of assumptions, and any number of events could end up blowing that speculation clear out of the water. A turnover of any kind, a big return, repeated 3 and outs, a couple of quick hit TD's byt Detroit ..... football cannot be predicted, otherwise there would be no need to play the game. I do know this, if one team is trying their damndest to score, and another team is sitting on their hands, an awful big deficit can be erased with most of a half of football left to play.

 

[DallasEast]

We should all pitch in and get JG a time calculator for Xmas.

What's a time calculator?

 

[Zman5]

What's a time calculator?

http://www.scottseverance.us/html/time_calculator.htm

 

[DallasEast]

http://www.scottseverance.us/html/time_calculator.htm

EUREKA!

:laugh1:

 

[Ren]

It's pretty safe to say that Garrett's stock has considerably dropped since that 2007 season. His offenses have been productive, but he lacks in-game management skills. He has now reigned over the two great collapses in franchise history. I agree with the notion that he is hindering Romo's progress. Romo is taking all the heat for this, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who can honestly defend the 2nd half coaching in that game. Garrett comes off as a skinnier version of Andy Reid at this point. He keeps you good, but will never get you over the top. It's just a shame that Romo is getting all the blame for this

Romo gets multiple calls he'll usually go with what ever he thinks work against the defense a lot of those passes also had a run called. Kill kill kill = Romo changing the play. McGee and to some degree Kitna did not have that freedom and our offense looked very different with them. It's hard to blame Garrett for the play calling when a lot of the time it's Romo changing the play at the LOS

 

[Zman5]

Romo gets multiple calls he'll usually go with what ever he thinks work against the defense a lot of those passes also had a run called. Kill kill kill = Romo changing the play. McGee and to some degree Kitna did not have that freedom and our offense looked very different with them. It's hard to blame Garrett for the play calling when a lot of the time it's Romo changing the play at the LOS

JG is the HC and the OC. He has the authority to take that option away from him at any time. Knowing what Romo tends to do late in games, JG should tell him not to change the plays.

 

[Ren]

JG is the HC and the OC. He has the authority to take that option away from him at any time. Knowing what Romo tends to do late in games, JG should tell him not to change the plays.

and he should now, but prior to Sunday you can't really blame him for trusting his QB

 

[Stautner]

JG is the HC and the OC. He has the authority to take that option away from him at any time. Knowing what Romo tends to do late in games, JG should tell him not to change the plays.

So, lets turn Romo into Trent Dilfer. Good plan. Wonder how far we will go with that?

If your QB can't change a play when he sees disaster written all over it then he doesn't need to be in the game. You have to have a QB who can make some smart decisions. If we can't eexpect taht from Romo then we can't expect to win games anyway.

 

[TNCowboy]

I think the Garrett bashing is absurd. If your plan is to run it 3 times and punt to give them 14 minutes, 14 minutes is plenty enough time to score 4 times. If you can't trust the highest paid player on your team to not turn it over 3 times in 25 minutes, you've got a much bigger problem than anything Garrett is doing with clock management.

 

[Zman5]

I think the Garrett bashing is absurd. If your plan is to run it 3 times and punt to give them 14 minutes, 14 minutes is plenty enough time to score 4 times. If you can't trust the highest paid player on your team to not turn it over 3 times in 25 minutes, you've got a much bigger problem than anything Garrett is doing with clock management.

Detroit offense scored 3 points in 35 minutes. So you think that they could have scored 24points or more in 14 minutes? Yes it's possible. It's possible I could win the lottery tomorrow too.

 

[Zman5]

So, lets turn Romo into Trent Dilfer. Good plan. Wonder how far we will go with that?

If your QB can't change a play when he sees disaster written all over it then he doesn't need to be in the game. You have to have a QB who can make some smart decisions. If we can't eexpect taht from Romo then we can't expect to win games anyway.

If you have a 24 point lead with 26 minutes to go, I would prefer a Dilfer like QB the rest of the way. If Romo played like Dilfer the rest of the game, we would have won the game.