The hate against Tony Romo, Jason Garrett, and our offense

[EndGame]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

 

[lane]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

romo had a hell of a game against the giants.

 

[khiladi]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

No, our offense looked pathetic against the Cardinals. Against the Cardinals, the offense was rendered ineffective until Marion Barber made some miraculous 70 yard TD run. The very next series, Dallas offense went 3 and out, in the red-zone, leading to the blocked punt. We couldn't do anything against Cincinnati, when they were playing the worst ball of the year.

 

[EndGame]

romo had a hell of a game against the giants.

He didn't turn the ball over, which is the most important thing. Also bear in mind that the Giants have the weakest defense of the last three teams we've faced.

 

[EndGame]

No, our offense looked pathetic against the Cardinals. Against the Cardinals, the offense was rendered ineffective until Marion Barber made some miraculous 70 yard TD run. The very next series, Dallas offense went 3 and out, in the red-zone, leading to the blocked punt. We couldn't do anything against Cincinnati, when they were playing the worst ball of the year.

This season has really had three parts for me. The first part was the first three games. The second part was game four through the time that Romo returned from injury. Part three has been since he returned from injury. I guess I was just comparing his performance to other games in "part 3". The team couldn't get out of its own way in "part 2", which is what you're talking about.

 

[JBS]

if that is the case we are in some trouble...the eagles boast the 3rd ranked defense in the NFL.

 

[DIAF]

So, basically you are saying that its perfectly acceptable to play like *** against the NFL's top defenses?

 

[EndGame]

if that is the case we are in some trouble...the eagles boast the 3rd ranked defense in the NFL.

Yeah ... I noticed that too

 

[EndGame]

So, basically you are saying that its perfectly acceptable to play like *** against the NFL's top defenses?

No, I'm saying it's understandable. It happens. Look at the performances of a lot of the top teams and QBs in the league when they played Pittsburgh ... particularly when they played IN Pittsburgh.

 

[slick325]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

The Eagles are currently ranked #3 in the league on defense by the way. So the pattern you speak of should continue on Sunday based on this post. Or, Romo and this offense will be better with ball security and execution while eliminating bonehead penalties (false starts or illegal formations).

It's put up or shut up time. In the playoffs all the defenses get a little tougher as do the games. There is no excuse. Dallas' offense has to respond to the situation no matter who they play.

Edit: Just noticed that someone else pointed out the Eagles defensive ranking.

 

[percyhoward]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically.

It's less "hate" than frustration, and I'll try to explain. Teams have success against the Ravens when the run/pass ratio is 50/50.

First half run/pass ratio in Ravens' losses
Indy 16/17
Pitt 24/25 (two games)
Tenn 12/13
NYG 18/16

Dal 10/17

We passed 7 more times than we ran. Even though we never trailed in the first half (until the last play). Even though Romo's back was clearly still hurting him. Even though Choice was averaging 6.1 per carry in that first half. That's not smart football, and it's a huge part of what separates us from those other four teams.

 

[dcfanatic]

There's a lot of hate being spread around these forums against our offense in general, and Tony Romo and Jason Garrett specifically. One thing that keeps sticking in my head is this: Think about who we've played in the last three weeks.

Pittsburgh is the unquestioned number one defense in the land. A friend of mine is big Steelers homer and loves to point out that opposing QBs always seem to have a "bad day" when they play his favorite team. Romo had a bad day. Could it be that he played a very good defense?

The Giants have another of the top defenses in the land -- number 7 in the league as I write this. They also know our team very well. Romo didn't have a great game. On top of playing a tough defense, he was also playing hurt.

The Ravens currently have the number two defense in the league. Romo, again, had a bad day against them.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Could it be that instead of our offense just sucking and our offense just sucking ... our offensive woes could be blamed on the fact that in three weeks we've played three of the top defenses in the NFL?

I get the point you are trying to make.

But it's more an excuse than anything IMO.

The Panthers put up points on the Giants defense.

The Titans put up points on the Steelers.

And we put up 24 points on the Ravens which should be enough to win an NFL game.

And if we are following the logic about playing good defenses they we shouldn't even go to Philly because their defense is ranked 3rd in the league right now.

More than 95% of the teams in this league don't boast the firepower we have on offense. This unit is underachieving and if they don't wake up there will be no playoff games come January.

 

[seniorette]

All of these hate and gripe pages make these "WalMart" guys feel like big wheels while they are stocking the shelves. They are standing there saying "I told that so and so that has 30 million in his pocket that if he don't do right I'll throw him under the bus and trade him for Eli".
NOW IS THAT WHAT YOU CALL "FANTASY" FOOTBALL?
MERRY CHRISTMAS, i got to go cook the turkey.

 

[Bleu Star]

So, basically you are saying that its perfectly acceptable to play like *** against the NFL's top defenses?

My thoughts exactly... There has to be more to his point... I hope.

 

[Bleu Star]

No, I'm saying it's understandable. It happens. Look at the performances of a lot of the top teams and QBs in the league when they played Pittsburgh ... particularly when they played IN Pittsburgh.

Oh... & it's acceptable?

 

[5Countem5]

So, basically you are saying that its perfectly acceptable to play like *** against the NFL's top defenses?

No what he is saying is that you people seem to forget that there are other teams in a game. Teams of professionals who want to win too. Sometimes those teams possess great defenses and play better on a given day.

Each loss doesn't mean someone on Dallas' team sucks and needs to be fired/cut. I mean, at least to people over age 7.

 

[bootsy]

It's less "hate" than frustration, and I'll try to explain. Teams have success against the Ravens when the run/pass ratio is 50/50.

First half run/pass ratio in Ravens' losses
Indy 16/17
Pitt 24/25 (two games)
Tenn 12/13
NYG 18/16

Dal 10/17

We passed 7 more times than we ran. Even though we never trailed in the first half (until the last play). Even though Romo's back was clearly still hurting him. Even though Choice was averaging 6.1 per carry in that first half. That's not smart football, and it's a huge part of what separates us from those other four teams.

I don't fault running only 10 times. We were down to one running back, a rookie running back at that. Choice was effective but he isn't a workhorse and in today's NFL you have to have two backs to run the ball 30-35 times. We didn't have that luxury. Plus Choice was catching screen passes. That is a heavy load for any running back.

The problem is not the ratio but what kind of passes were thrown in that first half. Not enough short routes, quick slants, things like that are what could have helped instead of trying to go for the homerun 3-4 times in that first half.

 

[casmith07]

Yeah ... I noticed that too

Doesn't do much when your offense can only put up 3 points against the R*dsk*ns!! :laugh2:

 

[TheCount]

romo had a hell of a game against the giants.

Like what has been said, he didn't turn the ball over. He gave us a chance to win it. He was off quite a bit in that game as well, I thought he was being overly cautious with his throws but he may have just been inaccurate. If he had done the same against the Ravens, then the 10 minutes of the game where he was really on might have been enough to win it for us.

The reason Romo is taking so much heat is that we could be 3-0 over this last stretch pretty easily, but his turnovers and inaccuracy lately have killed us in both those games we lost.

 

[casmith07]

I don't fault running only 10 times. We were down to one running back, a rookie running back at that. Choice was effective but he isn't a workhorse and in today's NFL you have to have two backs to run the ball 30-35 times. We didn't have that luxury. Plus Choice was catching screen passes. That is a heavy load for any running back.

The problem is not the ratio but what kind of passes were thrown in that first half. Not enough short routes, quick slants, things like that are what could have helped instead of trying to go for the homerun 3-4 times in that first half.

Nobody was saying we needed to run the ball to Choise 30-35 times, nor did anyone say that was the magic number to beat the Baltimore Ravens.

The problem IS the ratio. Without effectively running the ball consistently (we were effective, just not consistent because as soon as running for 30 yards we'd try and air it out) you CANNOT set up the play-action pass. When you can't set up the play-action pass, the opposing defense can keep playing the pass all day and dare you to beat them with the run when THEY KNOW you're not going to run it because your offensive coordinator is a "genius."