Tony Romo does make that much of a difference

[DFWJC]

Carolina has to be one of the worst undefeated teams in history right? I mean Olsen and Newton are top tier but after that? All JAGS. (Stewart is a jag)

Carolina is loaded all over the field and on both sides of the ball.
Have you even watched them?
Hate to see what they'd look like if the had Benjamin.

That doesn't mean Dallas can't beat them in Dallas this Thursday.

 

[perrykemp]

Carolina is loaded all over the field and on both sides of the ball.
Have you even watched them?
Hate to see what they'd look like if the had Benjamin.

Or Charles Johnson, their best pass rusher.

 

[Idgit]

They lacked a QB. Jim Caldwell went 14-2 with Manning and 2-14 without. In todays NFL, if you dont have a QB you are challenged. Therefore, when a starting QB goes down and you manage to win games (Tomlin, McCarthy, Belichick) that has to be attributed to somewhat to coaching. If not, seems more akin to caldwell.

To me, anyone who thought Weeden was good enough last year - let alone after this offseason - is open to serious questioning when other teams are winning games with 40 year old QBs, Mike Vick and TJYates

I agree, and said before the season started that QB2 was a bigger problem on this roster than RB1.

Unsurprisingly, I don't agree that our personnel problems early in the year were all QB related. It was the combination of QB play and the complete lack of takeaways that did us in in those six close games. And I don't see how to fairly blame the coaches for either of those things.

Well, it's true they should have known Weeden's ability. But it's not like there were QB options out there who were a lot better that we just ignored. We reportedly made a play for Shaun Hill. And then we moved too late to bring in Cassell. TJ Yates would not have made the difference.

 

[RomoFor6]

Carolina is loaded all over the field and on both sides of the ball.
Have you even watched them?
Hate to see what they'd look like if the had Benjamin.

That doesn't mean Dallas can't beat them in Dallas this Thursday.

Yup I have and they are definitely not "loaded" on offense. Cam makes them click. How they are fifth in PPG with jags all over the field I will never know. Their defense is very good, especially Norman, Kuechly and Davis. Kurt Coleman is putting up good numbers but he is garbage in coverage so we should be able to pass on them. Their D is better than ours but our offense is better than theirs. Our offense is a lot better than theirs actually. Our "gap" is bigger. The gap between our offense and theirs is bigger than the gap between their defense and ours IMO.

What do you think their record is if Cam was out all year? Just curious.

 

[khiladi]

I remember the year Romo got injured and Garrett was getting bashed again, Orton came in and the Garrett homers were saying that Orton ran the offense better and it looked better with him.

 

[CATCH17]

To me, if a team goes 0-7, there's plenty of blame to go around and that includes coaching. Just the nature of the biz. If I'm running a business, and I think all my processes are dandy but say, a key logistical factor goes haywire, I can't sit back and rely on that factor to just fix itself. I have to get innovative to get results.

I like Jason, and I like this team. Anyone with a brain can see what he's done for this team as far as talent and the cap. But if there's one knock on him, in my opinion, is that he's not very innovative. That's a good and bad thing I suppose.

I give Garrett no credit for the talent acquired.


It's all McClay and Jerry giving him the go ahead.


The talent on this team changed whenever McClay was brought in.

 

[TheDude]

Garrett had a 2 game head start to go 2 and 0 with Romo. Had Romo not come back for the season, it's questionable if we would have won another game and, if we did, I'm not sure we could pull out 5 and 11. I just think this season has shown that this rebuilding project and talent infusion people have laid at Garrett's feet has been a huge myth.

All in all, I dont think the talent is the main problem.

Sure, I think there are some talent issues at DT and safety - 2 positions not valued here even before Garretts tenure, and he doesnt get a pass on that because he is the supposed architect. LB seems to have talent but relies on prayers for players that are usually injured or a headcase. The Carr signing and Mo draft picks were bad. But the talent as a whole isnt below NFL average now.

The problem - to me - is that he is completely unoriginal and stubborn. We draft and love the 12 personnel because NE is successful with it - yet compare how the TEs are used. How many sideline routes do you see Gronk running where the ball comes 4 steps from the out of bounds? So you copy that look and dont have the personnsel scheme to use it, but you refuse to run crossing routes as other teams do every play. There is also this old holdover mentality about playing veterens I dont get. Free, Leary, Carr, Church, and even Witten to a degree (Bennett, Fasano, Escobar, all could have been incorporated more). THere are also undeniable obvious hidden in game gaffes that have been well documented

But most odd is the lack of eye for QB talent and WR development. To have such fanfare coming here as a genius and seeing Brad Johnson show the world he wasnt even a poor mans TIm Hasselbeck - let alone Matt, that was nearly unforgivable. Yet most laid no blame for that 2008 season at that decision. Fine, but then to see it repeated for 2 more years with the Weeden fiasco is enough. Many said after the Az game last year he was useless, and nearly everyone agreed after preseason. Yet here again, 0-7 later, many dont think there is ANY culpability. Another Romo year wasted.

And for WR, Dooley is another person who lives off name and connection with no accomplishment. He's smart and has a law degree, so that should be enough for success though

 

[khiladi]

The officials were responsible for a few phantom penalties, the players were responsible for the rest. The coaches don't coach penalties. These are pro's, not high school players. It's on them to assert a little self discipline, on occasion.

The first time Callahan took over play calling, penalties on offense dropped from upper 30s, to mid-lower 20s...

Coaching does affect penalties...

 

[khiladi]

I give Garrett no credit for the talent acquired.


It's all McClay and Jerry giving him the go ahead.


The talent on this team changed whenever McClay was brought in.

And Callahan with the OL...

 

[khiladi]

Garrett brings absolutely nothing... Personnel is the last thing those that defended him so vociferously, but are not the rabid homers, have left to hang their hats on.

And he can't even do that... Sharif Floyd was the pick which was squashed last minute by Jerry and then went Frederik, the guy Callahan worked out.

Garrett and Houck were drafting with big OL, until Callahan came and totally revamped the whole scheme. Felix Jones and Roy Williams as WR.. Guys consistently bailing him out to keep the delusion alive, like Miles Austin 200 plus yardage game against KC that was really just him breaking tackles...

Mo Claiborne was the first pick with Garrett as HC.. They sacrificed a lot, just like they did with Roy Willians to try and help Garrett's ailing offense..

Even today, the scheme has issues getting the 2nd WR balls to catch.. T Williams will have a big game randomly, but often times, he's absolutely invisible..

Romo finds him like he did with Laurent Robinson, when things break down..

 

[bkeavs]

I give Garrett no credit for the talent acquired.


It's all McClay and Jerry giving him the go ahead.


The talent on this team changed whenever McClay was brought in.

All the so call talent this team lost 7 games in a row without the QB Garrett inherited from Parcells

 

[KingintheNorth]

This place used to be divided into those who loved the Cowboys but hated Jerry Jones VERSUS those who love all things Cowboys (including Jerry).

Lately it has become those who love the Cowboys but can't stand Garrett VERSUS those who will make nonstop excuses for Garrett.

Tony Romo is THE REASON why we win. If he has a horrible game or is injured we have little to no chance if winning. If he has an average to spectacular game, we can beat anyone. Garrett does little to impact that either way.

 

[bkeavs]

This place used to be divided into those who loved the Cowboys but hated Jerry Jones VERSUS those who love all things Cowboys (including Jerry).

Lately it has become those who love the Cowboys but can't stand Garrett VERSUS those who will make nonstop excuses for Garrett.

Tony Romo is THE REASON why we win. If he has a horrible game or is injured we have little to no chance if winning. If he has an average to spectacular game, we can beat anyone. Garrett does little to impact that either way.

Infraction

 

[Broges74]

Defenses cannot put 8 in the box against Romo. They were run blitzing and making our backups beat them. They wouldn't dare do that with Romo. He'd throw for 500yds and 6 TDs.

 

[TheDude]

I agree, and said before the season started that QB2 was a bigger problem on this roster than RB1.

Unsurprisingly, I don't agree that our personnel problems early in the year were all QB related. It was the combination of QB play and the complete lack of takeaways that did us in in those six close games. And I don't see how to fairly blame the coaches for either of those things.

Well, it's true they should have known Weeden's ability. But it's not like there were QB options out there who were a lot better that we just ignored. We reportedly made a play for Shaun Hill. And then we moved too late to bring in Cassell. TJ Yates would not have made the difference.

When you are a supposed offensive guru and you go 3 of 5 games without a TD, I would say you **** the bed - and there were turnovers in 2 of those 3 games. I dont buy the "no one was better out there" When you consciously hold onto weeden you take yourself out of the market. When you dont draft a QB ever to develo, you consciously take yourself out of the market. All of those "No Romo Wed" could have gone to someone else, flip side, he probably got more reps than any other backup in the league and still they cut down the play book to 2 yard dump offs after read #1. So everyone knew Weeden was a loser last year or at worst - preseason, THEN he gets released at the first opportunity confirming what most knew.

I mean, it (backup QB) was his position and cant find a way to put up a TD in 3/5 games. A TD at either Seattle or TB has us in 2nd place. Just like not losing to the 2-14 rams in 2008 would have been good for a playoff berth

 

[Idgit]

When you are a supposed offensive guru and you go 3 of 5 games without a TD, I would say you **** the bed - and there were turnovers in 2 of those 3 games. I dont buy the "no one was better out there" When you consciously hold onto weeden you take yourself out of the market. When you dont draft a QB ever to develo, you consciously take yourself out of the market. All of those "No Romo Wed" could have gone to someone else, flip side, he probably got more reps than any other backup in the league and still they cut down the play book to 2 yard dump offs after read #1. So everyone knew Weeden was a loser last year or at worst - preseason, THEN he gets released at the first opportunity confirming what most knew.

I mean, it (backup QB) was his position and cant find a way to put up a TD in 3/5 games. A TD at either Seattle or TB has us in 2nd place. Just like not losing to the 2-14 rams in 2008 would have been good for a playoff berth

I'm not disputing that we needed to win those games or that the HC is ultimately responsible for it. But we didn't lose them because of coaching limitations. We can walk through each of the games, if you care to. It's going to come down to bad QB play and TO differential, though.

We didn't have a viable backup QB, that's for sure. It doesn't follow that we took ourselves out of the market. If you identify that as the problem, then it matters what alternatives were available and at what cost. Was backup QB worth giving up the Gregory pick for a team that got killed by a lack of defensive pressure in 2014 and a very good OL and a top-3 QB on the roster already? I don't think it was. Should we have done it instead of taking Martin to protect Romo a year earlier? We expressed interest in Shaun Hill in the offseason, I already mentioned, and he chose to go back to MIN instead. Were we seriously interested in anybody else? Was the option of bringing in Cassel earlier in camp realistic when he was competing for a starting job elsewhere? Were they maybe a lot more serious about Vaughan's upside and caught by surprise when he crapped the bed in preseason?

Setting aside how much of that's on the GM and how much on the coaches, I'm not sure how fair it is to blame the HC for not having a better option at QB. They took a chance and got completely exposed by it, but it doesn't mean it was a foolish chance, necessarily. Sometimes you can't cover all your bets. We rolled snake-eyes this season, and, yes, part of that's because of how we place our bets. But some of it's the dice. It's tough to blame the player for not covering the bet when he craps out.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This place used to be divided into those who loved the Cowboys but hated Jerry Jones VERSUS those who love all things Cowboys (including Jerry).

Lately it has become those who love the Cowboys but can't stand Garrett VERSUS those who will make nonstop excuses for Garrett.

Tony Romo is THE REASON why we win. If he has a horrible game or is injured we have little to no chance if winning. If he has an average to spectacular game, we can beat anyone. Garrett does little to impact that either way.

Oh I disagree with this almost completely. There are plenty of new people but the same people that were GROZ are the same people that are now calling people Garrett lovers and trying to force their worldview of blame and fault onto the rest of us. Another day another scapegoat. While there is doubt about a tree falling in the woods there is little doubt about your tripe.

 

[KingintheNorth]

Oh I disagree with this almost completely. There are plenty of new people but the same people that were GROZ are the same people that are now calling people Garrett lovers and trying to force their worldview of blame and fault onto the rest of us. Another day another scapegoat. While there is doubt about a tree falling in the woods there is little doubt about your tripe.

You say they force their wordview of blame, I say some force their apologist wordview of excuses.

Toma(e)to, Toma(a)to

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You say they force their wordview of blame, I say some force their apologist wordview of excuses.

Toma(e)to, Toma(a)to

That is because you are you and and I am who I am and the reality of point of view. Your distinction does not detract from my point that it is all nonsense that you have conjured up by yourself and your groupthink and does not speak to reality beyond yourselves. That I can empathize and anticipate your thinking does not mean I subscribe to it either.

I don't tell you what I really think of it and call it because most people would find it insulting. They frown on that here and it doesn't do much good so instead I put it in your terms.

 

[KingintheNorth]

Got it. Your opinion is always right, those who disagree are always wrong. Can you direct me to the purple blankets, shiny hats, and kool-aid?

In Romo We Trust.