Video: Eisen Punks Terrell Owens, lol

[percyhoward]

TDs from this group of receivers from their respective last 3 years as a Cowboy:

Owens - 38
Everyone else on your list combined - 40

The idea that TO didn't make this team better is ridiculous. We got extremely lucky (at least from a fan perspective) that Austin turned out to be who he is. I was extremely pissed about dumping TO until I went to the 2009 training camp and saw how good Austin looked.

The whole reduction in picks comes down to passes to that one position.

And although you can't compare 3 years of Owens as a starter with Miles' one year as a starter and 2 years as the #4 or worse, I heartily agree on that bolded part. We were damn lucky.

 

[Undisputed]

Ehhhh, I also don't buy that we got better due to the departure of TO. Hell, I don't even see how it's so obvious that we got better at all, despite the improvement of certain individuals. We are still a team of mostly potential; comprised of a defense stacked with highly drafted talent that is supposed to be "impregnable" and an offense with so many weapons that we at CZ hail it as "unstoppable" every offseason.

Hell, we looked dead in the water before the emergence of Miles Austin and it took an injury before our brilliant coaches even gave the guy a chance to prove that he was actually one of the best WRs in the NFL. Even after that, we looked dead in the water again after losses to the Giants and Chargers. The late season surge was very encouraging, but ultimately we ended the year being dismantled in another team's stadium....again.

Maybe we will ultimately be better off without TO. If nothing else, it probably forces the coaches to actually start utilizing some of our other great talents (though that is more about them than TO). But have we proved it yet? I don't think so.

 

[Primetime42]

TDs from this group of receivers from their respective last 3 years as a Cowboy:

Owens - 38
Everyone else on your list combined - 40

The idea that TO didn't make this team better is ridiculous. We got extremely lucky (at least from a fan perspective) that Austin turned out to be who he is. I was extremely pissed about dumping TO until I went to the 2009 training camp and saw how good Austin looked.

At the time, sure. There were really no other options.

Remember that the emergence of Miles was being banked on to pick up the slack.

Real or perceived, the distractions TO brought were no longer merited by his output.

I feel much better heading into 2010 than I did 2008.

 

[DallasDomination]

I was ok when they let T.O go because he is on the downside. But this notion that the team played better without T.O and it united them as a team is a bunch of crap.


We played fine in 07 and if it wasnt for some drops and stupid mistakes by the offense we could of won. In 08 everybody played like crap. And the only thing that I got out of it was that it was all T.O fault. Yea like a bunch of pro players are in shambles because the distractions of one player? PLEASE give me a break. Nobody told ROMO to force any throws to Owens nor did they ask the Defense to fall apart. He was the scapegoat in 08 for the Cowboys.


09 could of went into the same direction if it wasnt for Miles austin saving the season and then a bunch of other players stepping up after that. Aand lets not forget the playcalling improvement on both sides of the field.

 

[theogt]

The whole reduction in picks comes down to passes to that one position.

Are you still trying to say this is the result of the player, rather than the result of the broken hand?

Let's look at his INTs before he broke his hand in 2008. He had 5 INTs in six games and this is how they broke down in terms of which receiver was being targeted:

Owens - 1
Austin - 2
Witten - 2

Also, we can compare the number of TDs each of those players had in that 6 game stretch:

Owens - 5
Austin - 3
Witten - 2

Before Tony broke his hand, that offense was on fire and he and TO were leading the pack.

 

[stilltheguru]

Are you still trying to say this is the result of the player, rather than the result of the broken hand?

Let's look at his INTs before he broke his hand in 2008. He had 5 INTs in six games and this is how they broke down in terms of which receiver was being targeted:

Owens - 1
Austin - 2
Witten - 2

Also, we can compare the number of TDs each of those players had in that 6 game stretch:

Owens - 5
Austin - 3
Witten - 2

Before Tony broke his hand, that offense was on fire and he and TO were leading the pack.

nice. But I gave up on this TO debate on this board. He is a horrible human being and that is that!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[percyhoward]

Are you still trying to say this is the result of the player, rather than the result of the broken hand?

I don't think it's pure coincidence.

 

[theogt]

I don't think it's pure coincidence.

Of course it's not just coincidence -- he wasn't playing with a broken hand in 2009. It's also not coincidence that he threw fewer TDs without TO in the lineup.

 

[percyhoward]

I wasn't talking about his hand, theo.

 

[theogt]

I wasn't talking about his hand, theo.

And obviously you weren't talking about his 5/1 TD-INT ratio when Romo had a healthy hand either, were you?

 

[percyhoward]

And obviously you weren't talking about his 5/1 TD-INT ratio when Romo had a healthy hand either, were you?

That, and anything else you can come up with that has nothing to do with the targeted position-specific reduction in interceptions.

 

[theebs]

lol at this thread.

I guess zach thomas was talking about romos hand when he said this was the worst locker room he has ever been in and that it was his worst mistake of his career signing here..

yep, None of that means anything. Just stats.

How am I not suprised?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

You may not think the release of T.O. improved us now, but it sure as heck improves us for the future. And for that I am grateful.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

lol at this thread.

I guess zach thomas was talking about romos hand when he said this was the worst locker room he has ever been in and that it was his worst mistake of his career signing here..

yep, None of that means anything. Just stats.

How am I not suprised?

I was sort of surprised how Brooking came along and took a leadership position. I wonder why Thomas couldn't do as much?

Was that because of T.O., too?

 

[theebs]

I was sort of surprised how Brooking came along and took a leadership position. I wonder why Thomas couldn't do as much?

Was that because of T.O., too?

different personalities, and brooking became part of a locker room void of losers, egomaniacs downright bad guys.

All the guys brooking was speaking to were listening, they were working and trying to do the little things.

Owens poisoned the locker room by 08 he was toxic, there is a reason the highest order of professionals like brad sham, babe laufenberg and many others who cover the team locally who were in the locker room like matt mosely were outspoken about what a ******* the guy was in the locker room, particularly in 08.

Couple the head loser with the whining of gregg ellis and roy williams and the straight up bad character guys like tank johnson and pacman and you have yourself a disaster.

That is why no one could get control, it was that far out of balance.

and this is my last post on this topic, I didnt even want to comment on this guy to begin with, I guess I just couldnt help myself when his fanclub starts chirping. (all of which have been proven wrong repeatedly and there only retort is stats)

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

different personalities, and brooking became part of a locker room void of losers, egomaniacs downright bad guys.

All the guys brooking was speaking to were listening, they were working and trying to do the little things.

Owens poisoned the locker room by 08 he was toxic, there is a reason the highest order of professionals like brad sham, babe laufenberg and many others who cover the team locally who were in the locker room like matt mosely were outspoken about what a ******* the guy was in the locker room, particularly in 08.

Couple the head loser with the whining of gregg ellis and roy williams and the straight up bad character guys like tank johnson and pacman and you have yourself a disaster.

That is why no one could get control, it was that far out of balance.

and this is my last post on this topic, I didnt even want to comment on this guy to begin with, I guess I just couldnt help myself when his fanclub starts chirping. (all of which have been proven wrong repeatedly and there only retort is stats)

I agree with this %100. I was just curious what you thought.

 

[theogt]

That, and anything else you can come up with that has nothing to do with the targeted position-specific reduction in interceptions.

You really don't have to explain to me that you're ignoring statistics that paint a different picture than what you're trying to in this thread. That much is obvious.

Regardless, it should also be obvious that his broken hand did have an impact on the "targeted position-specific" reduction in interceptions. Over a long enough period of time, all QBs will have wide receivers as the highest target for passes that are intercepted. That's because throws to wide receivers are, at least more often than throws to RBs and TEs, "low percentage passes." By this I mean QBs generally throw deeper or more difficult routes to wide receivers rather than RBs and TEs, and these routes have higher instances of INTs and lower completion percentages. This is because (1) these throws are generally more difficult, (2) they give defenders more time to read and react to the ball in flight, and (3) the routes are more often covered by defensive backs rather than linebackers.

When a QB has a broken hand, it's going to exacerbate the more difficult throws, whereas the high percentage passes will be less affected. Even a simple slant route will be more difficult because of a broken hand. But a dumpoff to a running back out of the backfield or a TE in the flat will rarely get intercepted, regardless of broken hand or not.

And the great thing about this theory is that it holds true if you go back and actually watch the INTs to TO after he broke his hand. They were wild passes -- underthrown, behind, overthrown, etc. -- atypical for Romo. Some of them were so far off, TO couldn't even get a finger on them or contest them.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

You really don't have to explain to me that you're ignoring statistics that paint a different picture than what you're trying to in this thread. That much is obvious.

Regardless, it should also be obvious that his broken hand did have an impact on the "targeted position-specific" reduction in interceptions. Over a long enough period of time, all QBs will have wide receivers as the highest target for passes that are intercepted. That's because throws to wide receivers are, at least more often than throws to RBs and TEs, "low percentage passes." By this I mean QBs generally throw deeper or more difficult routes to wide receivers rather than RBs and TEs, and these routes have higher instances of INTs and lower completion percentages. This is because (1) these throws are generally more difficult, (2) they give defenders more time to read and react to the ball in flight, and (3) the routes are more often covered by defensive backs rather than linebackers.

When a QB has a broken hand, it's going to exacerbate the more difficult throws, whereas the high percentage passes will be less affected. Even a simple slant route will be more difficult because of a broken hand. But a dumpoff to a running back out of the backfield or a TE in the flat will rarely get intercepted, regardless of broken hand or not.

And the great thing about this theory is that it holds true if you go back and actually watch the INTs to TO after he broke his hand. They were wild passes -- underthrown, behind, overthrown, etc. -- atypical for Romo. Some of them were so far off, TO couldn't even get a finger on them or contest them.

Yes, theo, but none of this changes the fact that T.O. is a turd and we have a better team player in Miles Austin. Last year was not a typical year. We had a lot of changes occur early on that affected things.

But overall, other players got a lot better. I believe the departure of T.O. did have a positive impact on this team. After watching last year, it's hard to argue against that.

Surely, that's not what you're arguing. Are you?

 

[Kilyin]

lol at this thread.

I guess zach thomas was talking about romos hand when he said this was the worst locker room he has ever been in and that it was his worst mistake of his career signing here..

yep, None of that means anything. Just stats.

How am I not suprised?

I'm over Owens, not going to comment one way or the other. He's gone and it is what it is.

Just curious about the Zach Thomas comment... since this is all I could find...

On if he has any regrets from his career:
“No regrets, if I were to go back I wouldn’t change a thing. The only thing I would change is I went to Dallas out of position, that’s the only thing I kind of regret. Things worked so well right there in the middle, so why change? I was just trying to fit in because I knew they had a good team, but what do you know, it doesn’t matter how many good players you have, we didn’t even make the playoffs.”

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/052210dnspothomasinterview.26334e4f.html

 

[theogt]

Yes, theo, but none of this changes the fact that T.O. is a turd and we have a better team player in Miles Austin. Last year was not a typical year. We had a lot of changes occur early on that affected things.

But overall, other players got a lot better. I believe the departure of T.O. did have a positive impact on this team. After watching last year, it's hard to argue against that.

Surely, that's not what you're arguing. Are you?

What I am saying is that if Romo is healthy in 2008 and Miles Austin doesn't emerge in 2009, the difference between the two teams is pretty stark -- and that would be due, for the most part, to the loss of production from TO.