Discussion in 'Overtime Zone' started by ShortRound131, May 18, 2019.
Love SBNations YouTube videos. A painful day in Cowboys history.
I can't watch that. Too many bad memories.
This started a string of bad luck that ended with most I've ever seen for an NFL QB in critical situations. I mean all QBs have their share but never seen a QB that consistently had them in absolute critical games at critical times.
Anthony "*****" Fasano didn't even TRY to block. If he did, Romo gets the first or scores. I will forever hate Anthony "*** you" Fasano. You had ONE job.
That actually didn't bother me that much because the Cowboys didn't even belong in the playoffs. That team would never have made the playoffs had Romo not taken over in week 7, or 8, I forget. Also keep in mind there was 1:19 left on the clock. So I don't like the story line that it would have been a game winning kick. More likely than not it would have been Seattle lining up for the winning kick. I wasn't happy, but I didn't take that loss too badly. I was way more upset when Leon Lett touched that blocked FG on Thanksgiving day. And that was regular season.
Damn shame event. I feel bad for Romo. The team was pretty good. That year we could have maybe made it to the SB.
Romo is the one who had ONE job.
JWit got the 1st down.
I'm no Romo apologist but does no one remember the truth of the entire incident that came out after the fact? Back then, the home team employed the ball boys that were responsible for putting balls into the game for both teams and there were no specific kicking balls. The Seattle ball boys kept 1 or 2 brand new balls in the bottom of the bag for just this situation. If you don't know, brand new balls are shipped with a slick protective coating that keep the ball looking brand new. Before using them they are supposed to be rubbed down to remove that coating. The balls boys purposefully inserted a ball on that play that still had the protective coating on it. You can see it in certain close up angles of the play. The ball is very shiny. The league swept this under the rug but that offseason they implemented the new ball rules where teams bring their own balls and kicking balls are specified for each team. I think there are other rules as well like the ball boys are league employees or each team has their own guys putting their own balls in the game. It was a dark day indeed but mostly because the team was cheated. I don't put a lot of it on Romo. Beyond the intentional cheating, I put most of it on the long snapper. He should have realized it and asked for a different ball.
While this isn't good for our history, for league history this helped cause a rule change.
QB and Kick Holder....lets count together now....one.....and twwwoooooooooo. Two Jobs *in my best sesame street count Dracula voice*
Maybe, but Seattle wasn’t good and Pitt was terrible and ended up winning it all. We win in Seattle and I’d take our odds against a bad Pitt team although it seemed the refs had money on the Steelers in this game.....
That was the year before. This was the year the Colts and Bears faced each other. We did hand the Colts their first loss in the regular season, but that Bears D in 2006 was pretty dang good and I'm not sure Romo would have done well against them.
That's every new football. Fans tend to nitpick just about anything for an excuse as to why their team loses. Anything is better than the other team just being better. Yeah players like to scuff the ball, everyone does. Is it going to stop you from catching a ball? Maybe once out of 100 times. Is a deflated ball by 2 PSI going to allow you to beat a superior team? No. The Giants opening up the doors on one side of the stadium as the opposing team kicks a FG, did it make them champions? Nope. Minor details that have little to no impact on the big picture. Both the Cowboys and the Seahawks weren't very good that year. Excuses were the only thing keeping their season's alive.
Romo should have never been the holder once he was starting QB . Starting QBs in the NFL are not holders Parcells should have had a designated holder . Being the starting QB is enough responsibility without having to worry about holding kicks .
If the ball was slick or had some problem with it why did the Center not alert the REF he handles and sees it first before it gets snapped . Why didn't he ask for another ball before he snapped it if it was slick . Who should know what the ball should feel like anymore than the Center and he said nothing . WHY???
I blame Romo for a lot of things but this is not one of them . He should have just been QB not the holder IMO
There worst thing about that play is, it would not of happened if they had not cheated Witten out of a first down during that drive.
but if it weren't for 9...we wouldn't even have had a chance.
helluva gutty player.
And if he had been able to handle the snap and the field goal was made, the snap was at the 1:19 mark, maybe 2 seconds for the kick to go through, so Cowboys would have kicked off to Seattle with well over a minute to play, needing only a field goal to win. VERY possible Seattle goes down the field and kicks a field goal to win.
The loss is not totally on Romo, that play was not the last play of the game, what would have happened after the field goal will never be known...
Agonizing for four reasons:
1. Witten's first down should never have been overturned.
2. The Seattle ball crew cheated by deliberately doctoring the ball.
3. If Gramatica had simply blocked Babineaux for a split second, that would have been a Romo TD.
4. If the Cowboys' defense had simply held Seattle on the ensuing possession, Dallas would have gotten the ball back with great field position.