Thoughts the morning after

[pancakeman]

No, That SF game was a different year under different circumstances. In 2011 Romo wasn't coming off of 2 back surgeries in as many years.

True, but he was just back from missing the end of the previous season on IR with a broken clavicle...

 

[JoeKing]

True, but he was just back from missing the end of the previous season on IR with a broken clavicle...

And this is relevant how? Let's just stick to the now. Romo has had 2 back surgeries and just got his back hurt again. I say rest him.

 

[tecolote]

What chance did we have with an injured Romo with his deer eyes in the headlights during the blitz? That didn't happen to Weeden, he drove us down the field to score.

He was moving around well enough and you always go with your best player. Please tell me you know that Tony is much, much better than Weeden. It's typical, you see a backup do well in one drive and all a of a sudden he is the next Joe Montana, ignoring the factual evidence that he has never been even average. Go check his stats please, you might be surprised.

Why would any coach not use his star qb to win the game when doctors give him the go ahead. Especially since has done just that in the same situation twice already. Again, it's like Dez being injured, coming back with the doctors green light to a critical part of the game and the coach saying, no, let's give Devin Street a shot.

That would be dumb.

 

[JoeKing]

He was moving around well enough and you always go with your best player. Please tell me you know that Tony is much, much better than Weeden. It's typical, you see a backup do well in one drive and all a of a sudden he is the next Joe Montana, ignoring the factual evidence that he has never been even average. Go check his stats please, you might be surprised.

Why would any coach not use his star qb to win the game when doctors give him the go ahead. Especially since has done just that in the same situation twice already. Again, it's like Dez being injured, coming back with the doctors green light to a critical part of the game and the coach saying, no, let's give Devin Street a shot.

That would be dumb.

If you want to attempt to defend your position, at least get your "factual evidence" right. Not even attempting to be fair about the issue corrupts your credibility. We can have differing opinions about how Romo performed. IMO, Romo was moving around terrible after he returned, reminded me of a cockroach caught in the light. After he got hurt he was clearly not the best player, but I do agree, you do always go with the best player and at that time it was Weeden. So here is were you got it wrong... Weeden led the team on two scoring drives, not one... which is more than Romo did the entire game. Garrett even stated after the game that he was considering leaving Weeden in the game because of how good he had led the team on two consecutive scoring drives. Funny how that idea change after Jerry told Garrett "Romo would be back in".

 

[rpntex]

If you want to attempt to defend your position, at least get your "factual evidence" right. Not even attempting to be fair about the issue corrupts your credibility. We can have differing opinions about how Romo performed. IMO, Romo was moving around terrible after he returned, reminded me of a cockroach caught in the light. After he got hurt he was clearly not the best player, but I do agree, you do always go with the best player and at that time it was Weeden. So here is were you got it wrong... Weeden led the team on two scoring drives, not one... which is more than Romo did the entire game. Garrett even stated after the game that he was considering leaving Weeden in the game because of how good he had led the team on two consecutive scoring drives. Funny how that idea change after Jerry told Garrett "Romo would be back in".

That's not what he said. He told Garrett that Romo was coming back OUT (from the locker room) and would play if needed. That was the quote. There was no need to tell Garrett he would play if needed if he had already told him he was going to play.

 

[tecolote]

If you want to attempt to defend your position, at least get your "factual evidence" right. Not even attempting to be fair about the issue corrupts your credibility. We can have differing opinions about how Romo performed. IMO, Romo was moving around terrible after he returned, reminded me of a cockroach caught in the light. After he got hurt he was clearly not the best player, but I do agree, you do always go with the best player and at that time it was Weeden. So here is were you got it wrong... Weeden led the team on two scoring drives, not one... which is more than Romo did the entire game. Garrett even stated after the game that he was considering leaving Weeden in the game because of how good he had led the team on two consecutive scoring drives. Funny how that idea change after Jerry told Garrett "Romo would be back in".

Ok Einstein, the first drive Weeden led was one long run by Murray and nothing else, you could have Betty White at QB and Dallas would've scored. He played well, but I will go with Romo every time.

And the Jerry conspiracy is just stupid, he just relayed the information. Nothing to see there. You can see Jason's influence all over this team, he is no puppet.

 

[Coy]

Ok Einstein, the first drive Weeden led was one long run by Murray and nothing else, you could have Betty White at QB and Dallas would've scored. He played well, but I will go with Romo every time.

And the Jerry conspiracy is just stupid, he just relayed the information. Nothing to see there. You can see Jason's influence all over this team, he is no puppet.

LOL, thanks for the back up Tecolote.

 

[JoeKing]

That's not what he said. He told Garrett that Romo was coming back OUT (from the locker room) and would play if needed. That was the quote. There was no need to tell Garrett he would play if needed if he had already told him he was going to play.

Read the quotes for yourself...
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/10/28/6235872/jerry-jones-i-told-jason-that.html?rh=1
The words and only words Jerry conveyed to Garrett was, "Romo, would be back in". That's clear as day in my opinion. In the article he does mention the "if needed" part but that never was conveyed to Garrett. It's not a debate between you and I. If you have a dispute it's between you and the Star-telegrams report on Jerry's quotes.

 

[JoeKing]

Ok Einstein, the first drive Weeden led was one long run by Murray and nothing else, you could have Betty White at QB and Dallas would've scored. He played well, but I will go with Romo every time.

And the Jerry conspiracy is just stupid, he just relayed the information. Nothing to see there. You can see Jason's influence all over this team, he is no puppet.

Your smart *** remarks don't change the fact that you were wrong about the number of scoring drives Weeden was in on. Just admit you were wrong and move on. You blindly going with Romo "everytime" gets you beat.

There is no "Jerry conspiracy". He is on the record with what he told Garrett and it is not as simple as you would like it to be laid out. Read the quotes for yourself...
http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/10/28/6235872/jerry-jones-i-told-jason-that.html?rh=1
Garrett is a company yes man.

 

[JoeKing]

LOL, thanks for the back up Tecolote.

You need it.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

Hopefully I'm wrong about this team again, but it looks like the rest of the year just got a lot more difficult.

 

[Coy]

You need it.

You ain't even worth it my man, it's obvious that you and your 140 posts are clueless, see ya.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I am over it, just a bad game all around. It still boggles the mind that our entire offensive coaching staff could not draw up any plays to take advantage of the blitz.

Sell out blitzes or "0" blitzes where there are no safeties back should be easy pickings for a semi-competent offense.......................however I guess standing there and taking the sack works too

 

[JoeKing]

You ain't even worth it my man, it's obvious that you and your 140 posts are clueless, see ya.

What does my number of post have to do with anything? If you can't win the debate then just say so.

 

[JoeKing]

I am over it, just a bad game all around. It still boggles the mind that our entire offensive coaching staff could not draw up any plays to take advantage of the blitz.

Sell out blitzes or "0" blitzes where there are no safeties back should be easy pickings for a semi-competent offense.......................however I guess standing there and taking the sack works too

I don't think our offensive coaching staff failed to draw up a play to take advantage of the blitz. The failure was clearly in the execution of the play by the man with the ball. Your point about how a semi-competent offense should respond to a blitz is well taken... again the man with the ball was obviously (IMO) not competent in that moment. Our coaching staff failed in only one respect... putting the ball in the wrong hands in OT.

Just like you, I'm over it.

 

[IAmLegend]

#TankForLeonardWilliams was my initial thought.

Now, it's just win the rest of the games, starting with the surging Red Birds.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I don't think our offensive coaching staff failed to draw up a play to take advantage of the blitz. The failure was clearly in the execution of the play by the man with the ball. Your point about how a semi-competent offense should respond to a blitz is well taken... again the man with the ball was obviously (IMO) not competent in that moment. Our coaching staff failed in only one respect... putting the ball in the wrong hands in OT.

Just like you, I'm over it.

You dance with who brought you to the prom.....................we were 6-1 with Romo under center and he was medically cleared....................and unless the coaching staff is just a bunch of trained monkeys, you can do something to adjust so that is on them.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Well, now that we've had some time to let the loss sink in, I'm curious what the temperature of the forum is this morning. I'll start with some quick hits:

Once again, our rushing attack looked downright dominant. We gashed them on the ground all night and seemed like we were imposing our will on them. For some reason, we abandoned our identity at times throughout the game, especially at critical junctures. I was scratching my head at the lack of runs all night, and downright screaming at the TV in overtime. You have one of the best running games in NFL history. 19 carries for your stud RB? 25 carries all night in a close game? Inexcusable.

As well as he ran, that fumble was Murray's worst of the year. He was surrounded and being brought down by a sea of red inside the 10, after already ripping off an impressive play. Somewhere along the way, the notion of "fighting for every yard" became one of the most respected running back traits, but there is clearly a time and a place for it. He just doesn't seem to get it. I understand the ball getting fluke-ily knocked out by an elbow or something once in a while, but to be stood up like that in the red zone and have it stripped? Can't happen. His otherwise great game notwithstanding, losing points there likely cost us the game.

Hey, did you guys know Haslett likes to blitz us? Apparently the brain trust on offense didn't. Garrett, Linehan, Callahan, Romo... no one had an answer. It was like they didn't even have a gameplan in place for it. Romo, even before the injury, looked completely out of sorts as a result. His play action fakes were halfhearted and he was rushing the ball out.

I love Dez but he just completely disappeared last night. He has to make one of those catches in the end zone. Hopefully this quiets the Dez vs. Irvin thing for a while.

Nice to see Weedon come in and play well. I think he's better than some people realize. Yeah, he sucked in Cleveland, but with the weapons and line he has here, he could at least keep us competitive, and he brings the deep ball into play better than Romo.

The defense didn't play great, but I wasn't as angry about our defense as some people here last night. 17 points in regulation and a huge stop in OT should absolutely be enough to get it done. They had an off night; it happens. But their off night was still good enough to win. This one is on the offense generally, and the offensive coaching staff specifically.

Overall: I'm not too concerned with our team. The media and the Cowboys haters will come out in full force and say we're overrated, etc., but it's the NFL. We lost a game. I figured we'd lose a game or two we should have won. 12-4 is still a very strong possibility, and we can right the ship this weekend against AZ. This is no time to freak out.

That said, I am very concerned with the coaching staff. I thought we had established a clear identity: we will run it down your throats until you stop us. In a tough, close division game like this, we should be running the ball 30-40 times. Instead? 25 runs, 34 passes. Washington actually ran it more (31 rushes), and with less success (4.0 YPC). I hope somebody gets in Linehan's ear and reminds him how we got to 6-1 in the first place. Oh, and we face Washington again, so maybe figure out how to neutralize that blitz.

Curious to hear what others thought/saw last night.

Go Cowboys.

It was 90+ yards yards away from skins endzone. Definitely not the worst of his fumbles.

 

[JoeKing]

You dance with who brought you to the prom.....................we were 6-1 with Romo under center and he was medically cleared....................and unless the coaching staff is just a bunch of trained monkeys, you can do something to adjust so that is on them.

lol, it's Wednesday bro, move on