What Would Happen If Jason Garrett Had Not Been Figured Out?

[jay cee]

It's nuts that you guys are still trying to tie that game to Garrett. That decision and that bad throw were on Tony Romo.

I don't understand this bizarre fixation for blaming the wrong people for bad decisions all the time. It's not like you won't have an opportunity to pile on JG for a legitimate poor decision at some time this season. Just be patient.

This week was the week you were all supposed to legitimately pile on our QB. If we're going to overreact and act like a bunch of gay babies about things, can't we at least try to stick to actual talking points?

man we get a few guys in here trying to intelligently discuss their differing viewpoints on a subject, and thats the best you got to offer?

 

[Idgit]

gay babies....grow up and ditch the homophobia.

Lol. It was a funny line from In Bruges that just happens to fit you guys to a tee.

Shouldn't you be concentrating on pushing your agenda instead of acting like my life-coach, though?

 

[Idgit]

man we get a few guys in here trying to intelligently discuss their differing viewpoints on a subject, and thats the best you got to offer?

What thread have you been reading?

And it was a throw-away line. Lighten up.

 

[Cochese]

Lol. It was a funny line from In Bruges that just happens to fit you guys to a tee.

Shouldn't you be concentrating on pushing your agenda instead of acting like my life-coach, though?

Im not being your life coach, im telling you to quit acting like a fool.

 

[Idgit]

Im not being your life coach, im telling you to quit acting like a fool.

I'll give it the careful consideration I reserve for your other opinions, ok?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

You people? Are we a category now?? We are fans trying to diagnose this chronic losing against solid opponents. I don't hate Garrett as you purport. I just don't comprehend how we can't spread the blame, how one guy gets a pass. Romo is a liability, Garrett needs to reign him in. How does that equate to hate? This is my team, this is one of my passions. There are no excuses here man, this team loses big games and it starts at the top.

Look there's no magic number here. 50/50, 60/40, or 30/70. Whatever it takes just win. I don't care whose feelings get hurt. Right now even Jimmy Johnson is saying the same thing we are. Until Romo can settle down and control his propensity for error in big games, we need to reduce his passing attempts. Numbers are for nerds, there are no numbers. And stats are for losers like Dan Marino... (That was just said for effect.):laugh2:

Since you're using Jimmy Johnson's words so loosely, let's post them again...


Johnson said if he were coaching Romo, he'd have a 1-2-3 plan.

(1) He is well-prepared. "From what I hear," said Jimmy, "that's not an issue. Tony will work."

(2) Pull back the game plan against stronger opponents. Don't put the game in Romo's hands. "And I don't mean he needs to be a bus driver. He doesn't need to be Trent Dilfer," added Johnson. (Actually, I thought he was talking bus driver.)

(3) The bigger the game, the simpler the game plan. "That's not just about the quarterback, that's overall," said Jimmy. "People used to tell me, the bigger the game, the more wrinkles you add. No, the bigger the game, the simpler you get.

"The wrinkles are for the teams you know you can beat, so you can take a chance in those. The big games are about the team that makes he fewer mistakes. So keep it simple."

Johnson said if he were coaching Romo, he'd have a 1-2-3 plan.

(1) He is well-prepared. "From what I hear," said Jimmy, "that's not an issue. Tony will work."

(2) Pull back the game plan against stronger opponents. Don't put the game in Romo's hands. "And I don't mean he needs to be a bus driver. He doesn't need to be Trent Dilfer," added Johnson. (Actually, I thought he was talking bus driver.)

(3) The bigger the game, the simpler the game plan. "That's not just about the quarterback, that's overall," said Jimmy. "People used to tell me, the bigger the game, the more wrinkles you add. No, the bigger the game, the simpler you get.

"The wrinkles are for the teams you know you can beat, so you can take a chance in those. The big games are about the team that makes he fewer mistakes. So keep it simple."

Didn't Jimmy say that Romo didn't have to be Dilfer? Which is exactly what you and some others want him to be.

 

[Bluefin]

Didn't Jimmy say that Romo didn't have to be Dilfer? Which is exactly what you and some others want him to be.

Is there anything wrong with being Trent Dilfer for a game if it gets you the W?

There will be certain games where we should be a running team instead of a passing team, last week was such a contest.

There will also be weeks where the passing game needs to be featured and it will be.

My problem with Jason Garrett is that he seems completely incapable of taking the game out of Tony Romo's hands.

Garrett can get pass happy without thinking about it, but a team just dared us to run on them and we maintained a balanced offense.

If the ground game is working like it was last week and the defense continues to concern itself with the passing game, you must run on them until they show an ability to stop it, IMO.

Make the defense adjust to what we are doing well instead of trying to force the issue with the part of the game they are taking away.

 

[jay cee]

Since you're using Jimmy Johnson's words so loosely, let's post them again...


Johnson said if he were coaching Romo, he'd have a 1-2-3 plan.

(1) He is well-prepared. "From what I hear," said Jimmy, "that's not an issue. Tony will work."

(2) Pull back the game plan against stronger opponents. Don't put the game in Romo's hands. "And I don't mean he needs to be a bus driver. He doesn't need to be Trent Dilfer," added Johnson. (Actually, I thought he was talking bus driver.)

(3) The bigger the game, the simpler the game plan. "That's not just about the quarterback, that's overall," said Jimmy. "People used to tell me, the bigger the game, the more wrinkles you add. No, the bigger the game, the simpler you get.

"The wrinkles are for the teams you know you can beat, so you can take a chance in those. The big games are about the team that makes he fewer mistakes. So keep it simple."

Johnson said if he were coaching Romo, he'd have a 1-2-3 plan.

(1) He is well-prepared. "From what I hear," said Jimmy, "that's not an issue. Tony will work."

(2) Pull back the game plan against stronger opponents. Don't put the game in Romo's hands. "And I don't mean he needs to be a bus driver. He doesn't need to be Trent Dilfer," added Johnson. (Actually, I thought he was talking bus driver.)

(3) The bigger the game, the simpler the game plan. "That's not just about the quarterback, that's overall," said Jimmy. "People used to tell me, the bigger the game, the more wrinkles you add. No, the bigger the game, the simpler you get.

"The wrinkles are for the teams you know you can beat, so you can take a chance in those. The big games are about the team that makes he fewer mistakes. So keep it simple."

Didn't Jimmy say that Romo didn't have to be Dilfer? Which is exactly what you and some others want him to be.

I think that's your imagination. I don't remember reading any poster say anything like that.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I think that's your imagination. I don't remember reading any poster say anything like that.

pfffttt... http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163152

 

[5Stars]

I think that's your imagination. I don't remember reading any poster say anything like that.

Wanna get away?





You got punked!

 

[CF74]

Didn't Jimmy say that Romo didn't have to be Dilfer? Which is exactly what you and some others want him to be.

Show me where we said Romo has to be like Dilfer.

(2) Pull back the game plan against stronger opponents. Don't put the game in Romo's hands.

(3) The bigger the game, the simpler the game plan. "That's not just about the quarterback, that's overall," said Jimmy. "People used to tell me, the bigger the game, the more wrinkles you add. No, the bigger the game, the simpler you get.

I actually posted this article and this is exactly what many of us have been saying.

Can you define the line between not putting the game in Romo's hands and Trent Dilfer? Where exactly is the happy medium in that scenario?

To me, Jimmy is thinking back how he used Emmitt and Irvin hand in hand. Emmitt grinded it out and Irvin made big plays now and again. We need to find that with our group.

In your world, we pass more than we run, that's not what Jimmy is saying either...

 

[jay cee]

pfffttt... http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163152

I read that thread, but I did not see anyone compare Romo to Dilfer.

Wanna get away?





You got punked!

Maybe you can find it for me, because I did not see it in that thread.

 

[jay cee]

Show me where we said Romo has to be like Dilfer.



I actually posted this article and this is exactly what many of us have been saying.

Can you define the line between not putting the game in Romo's hands and Trent Dilfer? Where exactly is the happy medium in that scenario?

To me, Jimmy is thinking back how he used Emmitt and Irvin hand in hand. Emmitt grinded it out and Irvin made big plays now and again. We need to find that with our group.

In your world, we pass more than we run, that's not what Jimmy is saying either...

It's seems so simple to me. I don't understand where they come up with this stuff.

We're saying Romo is no better than Dilfer. We're saying they have to run all the time.

I have never said anything like that, and I don't remember anyone else saying that.

 

[CF74]

It's seems so simple to me. I don't understand where they come up with this stuff.

We're saying Romo is no better than Dilfer. We're saying they have to run all the time.

I have never said anything like that, and I don't remember anyone else saying that.

It's pretty dumb to infer that Romo and Dilfer are on the same page. If the Ravens had Romo of today back then they would have been a dynasty. Anyways I'm sure the spin doctors will continue to twist our posts...