Zeke only got 23 touches

ChldsPlay said:
This doesn't make sense. The Cowboys D isn't a factor in whether or not Romo would shred the Packers' defense. And did you just use a game that Romo played very well in, only had 19 pass attempts, and with 2 different teams 2 years ago as a reason he wouldn't have shredded them?

Even if you do all that (foolishly IMO) and you think he wouldn't have done better, that's fine. It's not unreasonable to think he wouldn't have done better. It's also not unreasonable to think he would have.
Click to expand...
The thing is he did outduel Rodgers in that game, he was just undone by A). the defense being awful per the norm B). Murray's fumble, and C). Dez's officiating debacle. Rodgers didn't have any of that and still barely won.
 
Staubacher said:
Dak threw about 4 to GB, they dropped most of them. I explicitly said Dak ayed well. But Romo would have shredded that garbage defense from the get go.
Click to expand...
The game ended with one pick for Dak. Romo played that same exact team in '14.
 
lqmac1 said:
The game ended with one pick for Dak. Romo played that same exact team in '14.
Click to expand...
Not the same exact team, they are far worse in the secondary, and that was before losing their entire secondary to injury. Not to mention their offensive weapons they were missing too.
 
Staubacher said:
First drive. Shoulda ran 3rd and 2 and if we didnt make it again on 4th. It was statement time on the first drive but Garrett wanted to play footsie FGs vs an all time QB.

And that 1st and goal right before the half with 3 straight empty set incompletes instead of Zeke was an abomination
Click to expand...

I dont recall EVER screaming so much to simply run the damn ball. Usually when we arent running enough its a product of down and distance, not this game!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BAT
Cowboy4ever said:
I think getting down 21-3 in a blink of an eye had more to do with the limited touches than the game plan. And as far as his int goes.. that was just a very awful pass, Looked to me like he missed his target by several feet, like he was throwing to Dez but Dez was the blocker.. the WR was behind Dez. That was just an awful play by Dak.
Click to expand...
I agree but the moment they scored to make it 21-10, I think the gameplan to run on them was back on. Especially to get down to one possession before halftime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BAT
Running the ball was not the answer when down 18 but I felt that Zeke was wide open in space on several plays where he was not thrown to.
 
The Packers ran a base defense a grand total of 5 plays. They were begging us to run with Zeke yet Linehan wouldn't bite :facepalm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: BAT
our coordinators kinda choked. linehan wasnt calling plays to daks strengths till 2nd half.

and the defense took too long to sumwhat "stop" #12
 
TheHerd said:
If course i generally agree, but the deficit came about largely because Zeke wasn't involved from the start.
Click to expand...

How can anyone say this without including the context.

Zeke ran the ball two of Dallas' first four plays. Dak took a sack on the 5th play, putting Dallas at a 2nd and 16 situation. Not difficult to figure out why they didn't run Zeke on either of the next two plays before the FG.

On Dallas' second possession, which was eight plays,Zeke ran the ball four times. Then the Butler penalty happened. Once again, you're not going to run him after that. . By the way, the play after the Butler penalty was a screen to Zeke.

Zeke was clearly involved early in the game when the situation allowed for it.
 
ChldsPlay said:
This doesn't make sense. The Cowboys D isn't a factor in whether or not Romo would shred the Packers' defense.
Click to expand...

The defense - or not having a good one - has CONSISTENTLY been given as an excuse for why Tony Romo doesn't advance in the playoffs. I've seen that excuse given incessantly. So it stands to reason that Romo wouldn't have done anything to get us to the NFC Championship game because we didn't have the defense to get there.

And did you just use a game that Romo played very well in, only had 19 pass attempts, and with 2 different teams 2 years ago as a reason he wouldn't have shredded them?
Click to expand...

Did we advance to the NFC Championship game?

Even if you do all that (foolishly IMO) and you think he wouldn't have done better, that's fine. It's not unreasonable to think he wouldn't have done better. It's also not unreasonable to think he would have.
Click to expand...

But would he have done enough to win the game and take us to a level we haven't been in 21 years? That's the issue. He may have "carved" the Packers defense up, but with this defense, it wouldn't have mattered. I'm using the same line of reasoning so many posters here do when they make excuses for why Romo couldn't get us to the next level.
 
TheHerd said:
3 1/2 weeks of rest and he gets 23 touches. Linehan needs to answer. I don't care if 13 guys are in the box, make them prove they can stop it before to stop it yourself.

The int was supposedly a run/pass option call, and Dak checked out to the pass because 8 guys were in the box. Sometimes running into 8 is a win with Zeke.
Click to expand...

We were down by at least two scores for most of the game and had to get away from the run some to try and stay with the Packers. We had to start making some plays in the passing game.
 
Scoring drives
32 passes, 14 runs

Non-scoring drives
8 passes, 10 runs

"passes" include 2 sacks and 1 spike
"runs" include 2 QB runs
 
tyke1doe said:
The defense - or not having a good one - has CONSISTENTLY been given as an excuse for why Tony Romo doesn't advance in the playoffs. I've seen that excuse given incessantly. So it stands to reason that Romo wouldn't have done anything to get us to the NFC Championship game because we didn't have the defense to get there.



Did we advance to the NFC Championship game?



But would he have done enough to win the game and take us to a level we haven't been in 21 years? That's the issue. He may have "carved" the Packers defense up, but with this defense, it wouldn't have mattered. I'm using the same line of reasoning so many posters here do when they make excuses for why Romo couldn't get us to the next level.
Click to expand...

What Romo would have done versus what Dak did is just a hypothetical. No one knows what Romo would have done in this game.

But what we do know is that we got damn good QB play and lost. Just like our last playoff game. Two playoff games where 2 different QBs played well enough that usually it would end in a victory, but, Dallas gotta Dallas.

At least we have another run of a decade of good QB play ahead of us and we can always look forward to next year when we inevitable fall a bit short (again).
 
I thought Dak played as well as could be expected, but the fact is GB couldn't stop Zeke and we didn't fully take advantage. I think the game would have had a different result if we ran on 3rd & 2 on the first drive & 3rd & 3 on the last drive.
 
Staubacher said:
First drive. Shoulda ran 3rd and 2 and if we didnt make it again on 4th. It was statement time on the first drive but Garrett wanted to play footsie FGs vs an all time QB.

And that 1st and goal right before the half with 3 straight empty set incompletes instead of Zeke was an abomination
Click to expand...
Yeap
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 9,102 (members: 77, guests: 9,025)
Robots: 1,927

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
475,026
Messages
14,577,130
Members
24,214
Latest member
whoami2066
Back
Top