Smith steps on Romos foot

[joseephuss]

Here's a grainy, but good, field-level view of the pick. Commentary on the image is not my own.

Well it doesn't look like triple coverage on that play. DBs do close on the ball once it is in the air, but the receiver isn't blanketed in coverage. If he doesn't step on Smith's foot he gets more zip on the ball and he also puts the ball a foot or so to the right. If Escobar square off his route that would have helped as well. Lots of factors went into that play, but not the triple coverage I keep hearing about.

 

[Idgit]

Well it doesn't look like triple coverage on that play. DBs do close on the ball once it is in the air, but the receiver isn't blanketed in coverage. If he doesn't step on Smith's foot he gets more zip on the ball and he also puts the ball a foot or so to the right. If Escobar square off his route that would have helped as well. Lots of factors went into that play, but not the triple coverage I keep hearing about.

I don't think it was the coverage as much as it was the inability to step into it that got him. That S is flat footed at the point of Tony's release, and it looks to me like either Murray (?) or Witten (?) were better options at that point. C'est la vie.

 

[Smith22]

OL needs to protect better on a freaking 3 man rush. Seriously.

I have no issues with the read, I just don't think he was able to zip the ball in there due to the lack of cooperation from his OL.

 

[joseephuss]

I don't think it was the coverage as much as it was the inability to step into it that got him. That S is flat footed at the point of Tony's release, and it looks to me like either Murray (?) or Witten (?) were better options at that point. C'est la vie.

Murray and Witten were probably better reads, but Escobar was not a bad read. Just bad execution due to Romo not being able to step into the throw and Escobar rounding off his route. Although after reading everything from last week, Witten would have been a bad read too just because he is Romo's BFF.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

It's not hindsight. They had 2 1/2 minutes with 3 time outs and the 2 minute warning to get the ball in fg range. It was an eternity, and they needed to kill all of that time so Peyton and co would have no chance. They should have come out running, especially with what Denver's defense was doing.

yep, I said it at the time, but of course Garrett and Callahan would have nothing with that

 

[Hook'em#11]

Yes, that's it! On 2nd and 16 from your own 14 yard line, with 2 minutes left in a tied game, against a defense that you've been carving up through the air at a historical pace but been almost completely ineffective running against, you've got to run the ball there! How can Garrett be so stupid?!

Ughhh.. Why even bother...

 

[Hook'em#11]

After the 1st down sack you would want to run it on 2nd and 16 to set up a more than likely 3rd and long with over 2 minutes left vs Peyton Manning with 3 timeouts?

No, I made an error on my post about that. 1st down , run, no sack. Possibly pick up some yards and keep the monster offense that was schooling the Dallas defense on the sidelines a little longer.

 

[Mitcha68]

Enjoy the cropped and still interlaced 1080i.

Ware forced this same type of play versus RG3 last Thanksgiving on the duck pass that he threw up to be intercepted after having his throwing base removed.

Down and to the left

 

[1LoyalCowboyFan]

Enjoy the cropped and still interlaced 1080i.

Ware forced this same type of play versus RG3 last Thanksgiving on the duck pass that he threw up to be intercepted after having his throwing base removed.

On an unrelated note. Who is the lineman running behind free. Was it Leary? For some reason watching him makes me laugh

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

Enjoy the cropped and still interlaced 1080i.

Ware forced this same type of play versus RG3 last Thanksgiving on the duck pass that he threw up to be intercepted after having his throwing base removed.

I'm glad someone posted this. But I'm sure that haters will still blame everyone's fave whipping boy...

 

[ufcrules1]

I don't think it was the coverage as much as it was the inability to step into it that got him. That S is flat footed at the point of Tony's release, and it looks to me like either Murray (?) or Witten (?) were better options at that point. C'est la vie.

Yeah, Murray is disgustingly open right there.

 

[Picksix]

Talking about 1st down. Even if you just gain 2 yards, it runs time off the clock and forces Denver to make a choice to start using their timeouts then or let it tick down to the 2 minute warning. Not saying you go into I-formation and run it 3 straight times, but it would be nice to start with positive yards on that drive.

That's playing not to lose. In that situation, you need to score. I agree he should have checked down to Murray, but you just don't run the ball in that situation. We were in the game because we attacked the whole game. Now, with 2 minutes to go and a chance to go win the thing, you want to play not lose.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That's playing not to lose. In that situation, you need to score. I agree he should have checked down to Murray, but you just don't run the ball in that situation. We were in the game because we attacked the whole game. Now, with 2 minutes to go and a chance to go win the thing, you want to play not lose.

You are acting as if we were having no success with the running game. I don't really see the problem with people saying we should have ran there. There are some very compelling reasons why you could say that running on 1st down might have been a smart move.

Because we ignored the run, I think you can say that the Broncos played us for the pass and I also think you can say that they guessed correctly and that allowed them to be in position to make a play on Romo's throw. We fall in love with the pass way too often. You look at Denver, a team who can surely be considered among the very best offenses in the league right now and they stuck to the run in that game, even though they were have tremendous success with the pass and even though they were not running the ball as well as we were.

Part of the game plan should also be that we leave Denver and Manning with no time left, just as they did to us. That's not playing scared, that's playing smart.

 

[TimHortons]

After you eat the cake, you no longer have it.

That is the point. You can't have it both ways.

Thank you for explaining that I never understood that saying, and no I'm not being sarcastic

 

[StylisticS]

If I'm not mistaken the interception was thrown on 2nd down. If they were going to run it they should've run it on first.

Which they should have done IMO.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

That's really a lot of hindsight. The line was protecting Romo very well all game up until that final drive.

I think I'd tap the breaks quite a bit on the protecting him very well comment.

Romo got out of a TON of sacks because of his athletic ability. This line didn't block all the well for him but as usual his ability to move around and make plays made them look like they played better than they really did. Still they gave up three sacks even with him avoid about a half dozen or more other than those.

 

[Picksix]

You are acting as if we were having no success with the running game. I don't really see the problem with people saying we should have ran there. There are some very compelling reasons why you could say that running on 1st down might have been a smart move.

Because we ignored the run, I think you can say that the Broncos played us for the pass and I also think you can say that they guessed correctly and that allowed them to be in position to make a play on Romo's throw. We fall in love with the pass way too often. You look at Denver, a team who can surely be considered among the very best offenses in the league right now and they stuck to the run in that game, even though they were have tremendous success with the pass and even though they were not running the ball as well as we were.

Part of the game plan should also be that we leave Denver and Manning with no time left, just as they did to us. That's not playing scared, that's playing smart.

I understand what you're saying, and your right in the sense that we pass too much at times, instead of utilizing the run more. I get all that. But the truth is, we don't run the ball well, and Denver has the top rated run defense in the league. And in that particular situation, we're in the 2 minute drill, 2nd and 16 from our own 15. Even if we had a good running game, that's a passing situation. As far as them knowing it was coming, they knew the whole game the pass was coming, and weren't able to stop it. Our guy was open. Our QB got tripped as he threw the ball, and their guy made a great play. When one thing doesn't work, it's always easy to say we should have done something else.

 

[Deep_South]

Why would we want to run the ball and take time off the clock when we are behind in one of the biggest shootouts in the history of the NFL, all the while playing against the king of game-winning, time-consuming drives?

 

[Brooksey]

3rd and long with the ball....

If you look at the stills when tony released the ball, escobar was wide open at that time.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

After you eat the cake, you no longer have it.

That is the point. You can't have it both ways.

Then it should be you can't eat your cake and have it too. Ha.