Normally it's Romo to Owens, after the game it was Owens to Romo
by Dave Halprin on Sep 30, 2008 1:14 PM CDT
in Dallas Cowboys News
Email
PrintI'm not even going to link to the plethora of "T.O. is causing controversy in Dallas" articles that are just about everywhere on the Net today. Besides, our man Tuna Helper did a healthy take-down of all that noise in this excellent post.
But I will link to this one from the DMN that has a little bit of fresh news in it. According to the ever-popular unnamed sources, T.O. took his complaints to the man who delivers him the rock on a weekly basis, Tony Romo.
The types of routes and throws are what concerns Owens, the sources said. The receiver, who the sources said was venting to Romo about his frustrations, has not liked how some of the throws were coming from the quarterback as far back as the season opener.
I didn't really perceive problems with how Romo's throws were delivered to Owens in the first three games, but Romo was definitely a little off with some of his throws on Sunday. Not enough to be blatantly inaccurate, but just enough to were he wasn't hitting his guys in stride like he normally does. Then again, Owens had a couple of passes in his hands that could have been caught but weren't. So it cuts both ways. Anyway, just thought I'd prop up the "controversy" a little longer so I could get my official MSM card.
Mickey Spags believes that the lack of a running game wasn't the key to the Cowboys losing, giving up 26 points on defense was the thing. Anytime Dallas scores 24 points they should win. Sounds like solid analysis so far. Except for a couple of things, seven of those points came at the end of the game when the Redskins were obviously in prevent defense mode and should be viewed with some skepticism. But even if you give them the full 24, there's still something else at play here. Now, I'm not going to defend the Cowboys defense, they did not play a good game. It's just that one thing is being ignored in the article. You can point to the 26-24 statistic and say you shouldn't lose, but how about another statistic? 38.09 vs. 21.51. That would be time of possession. Anybody who knows football strategy will tell you that forcing your defense to defend that much time in a game is asking for trouble. Of course you could argue that the time of possession is a function of a defense that can't get the opposing offense off the field. On the flip side, an offense that doesn't sustain drives is forcing a tired defense back on the field. The Cowboys had exactly one drive that lasted over 3 minutes; the Redskins had six drives over 3 minutes. And then there's this classic: Dallas gives up a FG to go down 23-17 at the beginning of the fourth quarter, and then on the following drive, including the kickoff return and the punt, held the ball for exactly 32 seconds. 32 seconds! I'm just saying.
It's all about the bounce-back game for the Cowboys. Lucky for them, they get the dreadful Bengals to take out their frustrations.
The magic 8-ball says all signs point to the Cowboys still being a good team. Yes, I know, it's a shocker.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Romo is starting to scare me a little this year
he, for some reason, doesn’t seem as sharp as he was last year. And an offseason of “working on his game” didn’t seem to cut down on the mental mistakes. Is anybody else worried?
Maybe a bit but what really scares me
is that this once dominating O-line is struggling against 4-man rushes. I watched the game again and seriously the Skins (and Packers before them) got to Romo in about 2-3 seconds with 4-man rushes and some of those guys are back-ups! If you reverse that and look at the lack of pressure by the Dallas defensive front, I’d say we already know where the problem lies – for time of possession, receivers not uncovering, CBs and saefties getting burned, RBs gone wild…
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
+1 Dunk
I’ve noticed it in the last couple of games as well. But it is hard to pin it on one guy. It just seems like the O line has become porous at times. And Romo is pretty good scrambling so I think they are looking better that they actually are. I would like to see Montrae Holland in there this next game and see if he is any help.
"So you can’t stiff arm at all? What about the throat?"- Marion "Barbarian" Barber
not so sure
People are going to get to the QB the line is doing a great job.. Zero sacks, I know Romo has something to do with that, but the line is doing there part..
Romo has been a little off with his throws and decision making.. He will be fine, but he needs to tighten it up a little bit..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
i saw that...
romo was a little off but T.O. did drop a few passes that could’ve been caught. i think that’s to be expected. but i agree. the biggest statistic in that game was time of possession. WE COULD NOT STOP THEM. this is the reason we lost IMO.
"They need security in the world, Craig!"
But was the time of possession differential
a function of the Cowboys defense or the Cowboys pass-happy offense? Which was the bigger factor?
by Dave Halprin on Sep 30, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
doesn't matter which was bigger, the difference was negligible
both contributed to poor clock management.
Ugh but what really kills me about the game is what would have happened if Hurd caught the onsides kick. I can’t stop thinking about it.
well that's a good question...
i’m hoping that garrett was trying to get something going with the pass and then had every intention of running the ball more once we scored or once we got a couple of substantial gains. it just never really happened. we never got up or got any momentum to control the game. i don’t know. to be honest our pass-happy offense and time of possession differential probably fed each other to our detriment. we couldn’t stop them, they keep the ball more, we get three in outs, we pass all the time which takes little time off the clock, they get the ball back, their rested, our defense is tired, they take more time off the clock, our D is tired so they make boneheaded mistakes, gives them first downs, they take MORE time off the clock. it’s a vicious cycle….
"They need security in the world, Craig!"
Garrett should have been flexible enough to start running more
When you see they were closing down the passing game, don’t keep forcing it, just switch to the run. Dallas has a darn good running game this season, he needs to trust it more. Then he could have had better luck with his play action passing. I’m not going to pretend to know more than Garrett, but I think he made a big mistake not running the ball more. I hope he learned from this game.
T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003
by APerfectStar on Sep 30, 2008 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions
+1000
If the guy is such a hot commodity, he should be able to see what thousands of us “amateurs” see so obviously. THe passing was not working, nor was running up the gut. Try a sweep, screen, dump off, change of direction ANYTHING. Losing is one thing, going gently into the goodnight is another and it sucks.
It's the O-line, I'm telling ya
it may improve when Proctor gets yanked, but the whole left side looks like the Rams right now.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
TO
Ive noticed alot of the throws not being where they were last year also. That first pass against Philly where TO had to leap and got undercut springs to mind. I imagine thats the type of thing he is complaining about because those throws put not only TO but any receiver in vulnerable positions. TO had to jump at least three times on passes the other day and then on a critical slant pass instead of the ball being out in front of TO where he could catch it and fend off the defender it was in tight and the defender was able to tie up his arms and forced a 4th down.
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Nobody mentioned it
And I can hunt down the link (but obviously not the source b/c that’s lost on the MSM these days), but apparently Witten went to Romo about his decreased role in the offense. Why doesn’t this make headlines? Oh yea, because ESPN doesn’t want it to…dbags…
by AikmanNailedMySis on Sep 30, 2008 2:16 PM CDT reply actions
Reason for Loss
Tuna Helper.
I’m with you " WE COULD NOT STOP THEM. this is the reason we lost IMO."
I am glad TO went to Romo
Because I thought Romo was a little off too..
Like you said perfect team for a bounce back.. Please believe Cincy will triple team TO hoping the cause him to get frustrated and blew up on the sideline..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
Time for Romo and TO
To hang after practice and get timing down!!
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
Spags
Disagree on this one. You don’t stick with the pass when you consistently go 3 and out and run no time off the clock. That just keeps the opponents defense fresh and wears your defense down.
Consider not only the time of possession difference, but also, I believe it was 95 degrees on the field and humid. You keep running to eat clock and give your defense a chance to rest while wearing the opponent down so that by the 4th Q you can dominate them. It’s a game plan that the Skins followed, and it’s what let them beat a more talented team.
The defense didn’t play as well as they should have, but IMO by never running the ball that only compounded the problem. The Dallas offense didn’t do it’s defense any favors.
T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003
Spags is a poor analyst.
That’s why he got kicked out of the room when Moose showed up in the preseason. His biggest problem is the inability to admit that he is sometimes wrong and doesn’t know everything. When confronted with that, he goes into the “you’re so dumb and just don’t get it” mode. You should win when you’re offense scores more than the other team, not when they score 24 points. That’s all that matters, and it’s quite simple. There are so many factors that affect the score, that you can’t just pick a magic number and say, well, if they accomplish that, they played well. If you’re offense keeps giving the ball back to the other team with good field position, they’re going to score points. I’m not saying that the defense played well, because they were not good, but neither was the offense or the play calling, whomever was responsible.
by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2008 4:09 PM CDT reply actions
Hilarious.
His answer today about whether Spears and Canty play poorly against the run was something to the effect of “I don’t know where you’re getting your stats from, but…” Um, how about the stats on the website that you work for, which match the stats on NFL.com. He’s also great at twisting numbers, as he thinks if he throws out numbers, people won’t know that he’s full of it. There’s a reason that team tackle stats aren’t official, and that tackle rankings aren’t counted by assists, but by solo tackles. Wade says that Bradie James had 18 tackles, but the NFL says he had 4 and 6 assists. It’s like when I wrote in about Romo in the red zone, and he put in how many times the Cowboys scored in the red zone last year, without mentioning that they were in the bottom 3rd of the league in scoring % and TD %.
by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2008 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions
James is overrated...
but the Redskin game was his best of the season. The Cleveland game he didn’t register one tackle…The problem with these LB’s is they don’t get to the QB when they blitz and they are poor in coverage.
Look up... get up...Don't ever, ever give up!!
We need to start looking into
drafting a dominate 3-4 ILB in the next year or so.
Look up... get up...Don't ever, ever give up!!
Is it the LBs?
I go back and forth between thinking it’s the linebackers, or the defensive line. It’s no secret that Ratliff plays a different style of NT than Jason Ferguson, and Canty and Spears seem to get handled one on one for the most part. I thought the 3 guys up front in a 3-4 were supposed to each almost need a double team every down to move them out, so that the LBs come in free and clean house. The Cowboys seem to rarely make plays in the backfield except for Ware. I’m starting to think that the problem is the DL getting handled one on one, leaving 2 OL, the FB, and TE to get after the linebackers. If Ratliff demanded a double team every time to get moved out of the middle, Bradie and Zach would probably have a field day. I don’t know. I guess I don’t understand Brian Stewart’s version of the 3-4.
by Baked Potato Soup on Sep 30, 2008 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Its his job, but he is a way over the top Homer!
I also agree with Potato’s comment about his passive agressive better than thou attitude at times. Its gotten to the point were its hard to respect his opinion on anything.
Our O has relied heavily on quick strikes
rather than grind-it-out methodical drives so far this season. It almost seems when the quick strike doesn’t happen, our impatience gets the better of us. In this way, Garret and Romo don’t complement each other (or even TO for that matter) – their preference to be aggressive may compound the situation.
'You can recognize true genius by this: all the dunces are in confederacy against you' - Sir Francis Bacon
I agree
Last year the Buff, Det, and the PHi games were examples where they were looking to exploit mis-matches in the offense. Last weeks game was another example, they kept looking for mis-matches and the skins were able to pressure them. Last year it took dallas time to snap out of it and grind it out with short passes and mixing in the run, but this time the skins were too good of a team for dallas to figure it out. Both Romo and Garrett love to make the big play, and according to the coaches Romo may have been too agressive. I have faith that he will listen to the coaches and his teammates to dial it down and let the game come to him.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
i respect this
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking?season=2008&week=5
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
I don't
Pittsburgh was TERRIBLE last night and should thank the heavens they won. Willie Parker is out and now so is Mendenhall for the year. They will not make the playoffs and this ranking calls them “One of the AFC’s best.” Crap analysis.
The theme for sports reporting this year is “Taking things out of context – 24/7”. Between the officiating and reporting, the NFL is getting buried in a pile of cow doody.
Right
Pittsburgh is more toast than NE right now.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
I agree in part
Pitt is a better team then NE. Offense is just as good, but the D is much better..
I do think there are 5 below them that are better, especially with line banged up and Parket out..
"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"
Romo is off?
To his credit, he’s been better this year than last.
Last year every deep pass or quick pass in the flats made his receiver slow down or turn back to catch it. Except for last week and one or two floaters, his timing has improved. It’s his decisions and awareness that kill me.
TO....
Yes, I admit I am a Parcells fanboy but I can’t stop wondering how things would have turned out if Parcells had had the authority to nix the deal for TO. Am I the only one who thinks Bill would still be coaching if “the player” hadn’t made him sick and tired of coaching?
Here’s another question. If Roger Staubach was quarterbacking this team do you think he would have audibled all those running plays to passes to TO?
Eight carries for Barber? Zero carries for Felix? While TO gets two running attempts?
by giant fan since 57 on Sep 30, 2008 5:22 PM CDT reply actions
-1
Tony wasn’t being insubordinate in his audibles. Garrett said it was the game plan. With the benefit of hindsight, Wade said they should’ve maybe adjusted.
Parcells himself said that TO had nothing to do with him leaving coaching. And he said it after he was no longer coaching. Sure, Parcells wasn’t wild about him. But Parcells said TO never was insubordinate or profane in his relationship with the coaches. He’s a diva, not a disciplinary problem like Plaxico Burress.
by TimSchultz36 on Sep 30, 2008 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Back in Roger's day
they didn’t do a heck of a lot of passing.
Parcells was to also blame for his relationship with Owens. He’s good at scaring guys, but he has trouble with guys that doesn’t work for. Coughlin, to his credit, figured that out last season and it paid off in spades.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Back in Roger's day?
“They didn’t do a lot of passing?” You and I have different memories. Roger had nearly 3000 passing attempts for over 22,000 yards!
Here’s the link….
http://www.nfl.com/players/rogerstaubach/profile?id=STA762496
Parcells was the ultimate motivator. I’m not knocking Phillips. I think he is just in over his head. He is a decent guy and a decent coach. Every coach uses what he is best at. Parcells just happens to be the best at getting the most out of his players in my opinion. And yes, I think he was better at it than Coughlin. Actually I think Parcells is one of the greatest coaches in the history of the NFL.
by giant fan since 57 on Sep 30, 2008 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions
And Romo has already "passed" all of Staubach's big passing days.
I’ve been watching classic games to refresh my Staubach memories (and he was my childhood hero), including the “Hail Mary” game against Minnesota and they ran at times when today it would DEFINITELY be passing downs. Same with Tarkington. They ran a crap load back then.
Parcells was a great motivator and I liked his Giants. But his inability to bend a little made him less suitable for today’s athlete. This ain’t his daddy’s NFL.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Parcell's
actions, body language, derogatory tone, and the fact that he constantly referred to TO as " the player" said otherwise. Did you really expect him to say TO disgusted him so much he decided to quit? Just my opinion.
As for Wade, what kind of coach doesn’t step in and say, “What the hell are we throwing all these passes for when we’ve got a great running game?” Isn’t that his job?
Plaxico has plenty of problems too. If he is not careful he may get “Shockeyed.”
by giant fan since 57 on Sep 30, 2008 5:36 PM CDT reply actions
Phillips is a delegator
and functions by letting coaches coach and players play, and embarrassing no one along the way. They will square it away, just not in front of ESPN.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
