Shanahan comment about Romo

[5Stars]

You make a good point that can be expanded on. Dallas has not had the team to compete in a payoff game in several years even if they made it that far. Romo is not the whole problem, but his play in certain situations hasn't helped.

Yeah, Romo does make mistakes, he's not as perfect as say Eli, or the other greats. You know the greats that have rings because of their TEAM?

Romo is the REASON that this team is even able to be in a position to try and win games! But the concept of TEAM does not come into play when Romo loses a game. Every loss is on Romo...he handles the ball on every snap! WOOT

 

[percyhoward]

I said he was off balance with defenders all around him and he made a bad decision. I said nothing about him being off balance "before" he made the throw. He was off balance "during" the throw.

If you're saying that he made a bad decision, and that this bad decision had nothing to do with his being off-balance, then the question is, what made it a bad decision?

 

[birdwells1]

I side with kjj on this one but I just think that Romo needs something good to happen to him in that "moment" to get him over the hump. Drew Pearson said that without the "hail Mary" he and Rogers career would be looked at differently, Montana without "The Catch", Elway without "The Drive", Eli without his 2 game winning drives in the sb have all performed well in their moment. Romo has had the chance put a stamp on his career but has failed in his moment, if his career ended today he'd be known more for the bobbled snap in Seattle than anything else.

 

[KJJ]

If you're saying that he made a bad decision, and that this bad decision had nothing to do with his being off-balance, then the question is, what made it a bad decision?

Romo had defenders all around him and forced the ball into coverage when he had Murray open that's what made it a bad decision. The intended receiver Escobar had 3 defenders around him. It was 2nd and 16 and Romo forced the ball into coverage trying pick up enough yards to leave the Cowboys a manageable 3rd down. Had he gone to an open Murray he could have picked up 6-7 yards and the Cowboys would have lived to see another down.

 

[percyhoward]

Romo had defenders all around him and forced the ball into coverage when he had Murray open that's what made it a bad decision. The intended receiver Escobar had 3 defenders around him.

By "coverage," are you referring to the trailing defender, or the one standing 7 yards away?

If Romo's not tripped, why would you assume anything other than a completion?

 

[5Stars]

 

[DFWJC]

By "coverage," are you referring to the trailing defender, or the one standing 7 yards away?

If Romo's not tripped, why would you assume anything other than a completion?

That is awesome.
Great view.
I wonder if Romo would have gone to Murray if it wasn't 2nd and 16? Probably still may have gone to the deeper route , as he had been threading the needle all dat and that throw looked very doable.

Of course, the obvious and amazing thing is that we are still dissecting that play when without is outer worldly performance, we lose by 3 TDs

 

[Kevinicus]

Oh good, you see the ridiculousness of that reasoning.

 

[Cebrin]

By "coverage," are you referring to the trailing defender, or the one standing 7 yards away?

If Romo's not tripped, why would you assume anything other than a completion?

Clearly he was supposed to run an L route and stupidly decided in the middle of Romo's throw motion to do a Z. Stupid route but, even worse was our stupid defense.

 

[Red Dragon]

I wonder if Romo would have gone to Murray if it wasn't 2nd and 16?

You know, come to think of it, if Romo had thrown to Murray, and Murray had immediately cut left after catching the ball, I think the Denver defender covering Escobar would have been running so hard in the direction opposite of Murray that the field would have been open and Murray would have gained perhaps 10-12 yards until the Broncos safety made an open-field tackle on him.

But oh well, I'm overanalyzing a play that never happened.

 

[KJJ]

By "coverage," are you referring to the trailing defender, or the one standing 7 yards away?

If Romo's not tripped, why would you assume anything other than a completion?

Looking at a picture is pointless you need to study the game tape. When the ball arrived Escobar had 3 defenders around him. Had Romo not been tripped it's hard to assume a completion when he was going to a rookie who's had only 4 receptions all season and was surrounded by 3 defenders. If you want to speculate and assume the pass would have been completed had Romo not been tripped and use a picture to determine it go right ahead.

 

[KJJ]

Oh good, you see the ridiculousness of that reasoning.

Yeah I did because it was "your" reasoning.

 

[Kevinicus]

Yeah I did because it was "your" reasoning.

Nope, merely an extension of what you've been arguing.

 

[Red Dragon]

I actually agree with KJJ that the throw to Escobar was a bad idea and a foolish throw.

My gripe is with people who cannot understand that a 500-yard, 5-TD quarterback has already contributed an enormous share of effort towards the win cause. Blaming Romo for the defeat is like blaming a long-distance runner who runs an almost record-breaking 50 miles but somehow just cannot run one more mile, stumbling at the 50.5-mile mark.

 

[5Stars]

You know, come to think of it, if Romo had thrown to Murray, and Murray had immediately cut left after catching the ball, I think the Denver defender covering Escobar would have been running so hard in the direction opposite of Murray that the field would have been open and Murray would have gained perhaps 10-12 yards until the Broncos safety made an open-field tackle on him.

But oh well, I'm overanalyzing a play that never happened.

What ever went through the mind or Romo at that time...stepped on or not, he probably should have checked down to Murray. But, in the heat of the moment, trying to win a game against the best knowing that the defense could not stop Manning, he did what he thought was the best decision. Maybe it wasn't?

But, if anyone that dogs Romo for that throw? Any other QB on this same team with this same DEFENSE would have never had a chance! And, as the saying goes, if you never take a chance, you will never succeed. In this case, Romo took that chance, and his team did not succeed. It's as simple as that.

 

[car351]

I side with kjj on this one but I just think that Romo needs something good to happen to him in that "moment" to get him over the hump. Drew Pearson said that without the "hail Mary" he and Rogers career would be looked at differently, Montana without "The Catch", Elway without "The Drive", Eli without his 2 game winning drives in the sb have all performed well in their moment. Romo has had the chance put a stamp on his career but has failed in his moment, if his career ended today he'd be known more for the bobbled snap in Seattle than anything else.

Well said

 

[percyhoward]

Looking at a picture is pointless you need to study the game tape. When the ball arrived Escobar had 3 defenders around him. Had Romo not been tripped it's hard to assume a completion when he was going to a rookie who's had only 4 receptions all season and was surrounded by 3 defenders. If you want to speculate and assume a completion had Romo not been tripped and use a picture to determine it go right ahead.

What is your point about Romo being off-balance and surrounded by defenders if you don't think that had any effect on either the direction or velocity of the pass, KJJ? And if it did affect the direction and/or velocity of the pass, what difference does it make where or when the ball arrived?

 

[car351]

I actually agree with KJJ that the throw to Escobar was a bad idea and a foolish throw.

My gripe is with people who cannot understand that a 500-yard, 5-TD quarterback has already contributed an enormous share of effort towards the win cause. Blaming Romo for the defeat is like blaming a long-distance runner who runs an almost record-breaking 50 miles but somehow just cannot run one more mile, stumbling at the 50.5-mile mark.

So who gets the blame for Denver's loss in the playoffs? The safety who gave up the game tying TD or the 4 time MVP QB who threw back across his body for the pick?

 

[percyhoward]

Of course, the obvious and amazing thing is that we are still dissecting that play when without his outer worldly performance, we lose by 3 TDs

It's funny, this one play was discussed ad nauseam here earlier in the week, and I didn't pay that discussion much attention -- for that very reason.

Bored now, I guess.

It's surprising to see how so many people can look at what is basically a routine pass, and call it an ill-advised throw because the QB and LT got their feet tangled.

 

[Clove]

In the eyes of the Romo lovers, he's never thrown an interception, he's never been responsible for a loss. People who call themselves football smart, just can't seem to understand that when you use the term, TEAM GAME, then you have to exclude his stats. Because a team game doesn't personalize a single person's stats. All stats are team oriented. People LOVE saying team sport yet turn around and say, Romo, Romo, Romo. Doesn't sound like they are talking about the team, seems like they are praising one person. And if he's carrying the team, why couldn't he carry this team to the Super Bowl? Why can't he carry this team to the playoffs every year? And no matter what team we surround him with, HE is still here. And no matter who plays around him, it's not enough. He needs an All-Star defense, and All-star running back, and 5 All-Stars across the line in order to succeed. Meanwhile, other QBs find a way with what they have.

Every year Romo lovers has a new excuse. 1 year it was Owens, then it was Flozell, then it was Newman, and Ellis, Gurode, Free, and Pack Man, Bennett, and Wade Phillips, and the offensive line, then the defense, now the running back. It's always something with this guy. And his fans look for that 1 or 2 games a year where he's unstoppable, which all QBs go through at some point during a season, and when he has that type of game, his lovers lose their mind. What is mind boggling is people who always act as if it's NEVER Romo's fault. This makes people look silly. He had an amazing game, but his brain won't allow him to come through when we need him and just simply finish games. He just doesn't have the stomach for big moments. It's been proven time and time and time again. And all the lovers want to do is look at what others did. There are some guys on this board, and I know exactly who they are, these people will trash everyone on the team but Romo. If Romo threw 5 interceptions in a row with no QB pressures and receivers wide open, they would find a way to blame something else. Loyalty doesn't mean you have to be stupid.

Manning has NO defense, but he finds a way. If you score 48, you should win right? Except Manning needed 51 so that's what he got, or Romo gave him.The point is, neither defense was going to help the other side, so it was up to both QBs to simply make plays without stupid mistakes, and he almost ALWAYS fails.. He didn't use his pathetic defense as to why he couldn't win, but the Romo lovers do this. What's sad is, I've written this same post every year for 4 or 5 years, and I've mentioned 5 years ago exactly what I'm saying today. How did I know the future? I didn't, but what I did know back then was that all Romo was going to do is what Jerry does to fans every year. He gets them excited about something and everyone's on board, only to fail at the end of the season. Jerry and Romo are the same. Jerry = All talk no action. Romo = all stats no championships.