Stephen Jones: 0-5 without Romo is unacceptable

[1bigfan13]

By Rainer Sabin Follow
Staff Writer

Published: 03 November 2015 06:54 PM

IRVING -- Life without Tony Romo hasn't been easy for the Cowboys. Executive vice president Stephen Jones is the first to acknowledge that.

"We feel like we should be doing better than what we're doing," Jones said. "We didn't expect to be setting the world on fire. But obviously we think we have to do better than go 0-5 without Tony. That's unacceptable. We have done better than that before without Tony so this is disappointing."

Jones, however, expressed faith in Matt Cassel, who passed for only 97 yards in a 13-12 loss to Seattle one week after throwing three interceptions in a defeat to the New York Giants.

"He had the big turnovers against the Giants and I think he was wanting to rectify that and do better," Jones said. "Was he a little too conservative? Maybe. Is there a middle ground in there? Probably. But I do like the way he's leading our team right now. We're close."

Still, Jones isn't thrilled with where the Cowboys stand.

"I think we're a better team than that," Jones said. "But as Bill Parcells used to say, around here you are what you are and we're 2-5 and we accept that and we're accountable to it. Obviously we didn't do some things as well as we should have or we wouldn't be sitting here."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yesterday I was talking to another Cowboys fan about how even without Romo going 0-5 is unacceptable, given the amount of talent that's on the team.

I'm hoping the Jones don't give Garrett a free pass just because his star QB has been sidelined. I look around the league at teams like Houston, San Francisco, and Washington......teams that have marginal to average QBs and somehow their coaches have found a way to scratch out a win or two. The Steelers won games with Vick and Landry Jones. And Bruce Ariens led a team to the playoffs with a 3rd string QB.

But here in Dallas we can't win a single game without Romo. That's coaching. That's not on Weeden or Cassel. If this team goes 0-7 in games without Romo, Garrett needs to be shown the door because he's clearly not a difference maker.

 

[UncleMilti]

It's coaching but it's also having a front office who can find decent backup talent and sprinkle them at some key positions.

 

[townsend]

I blame hubris. They "thought they had something" with a lot of shithouse players. Dunbar, Randle, Thomas,Vaughan etc.

We had a lot of question marks coming into the season, and the answers were all found on the scrap heap.

 

[Texas Ace]

Totally agree.

Thos 0-5 slide is on the coaching staff, but my guess is that Garrett isn't held accountable by the Jones' when it's all said and done.

 

[Carp]

I blame hubris. They "thought they had something" with a lot of shithouse players. Dunbar, Randle, Thomas,Vaughan etc.

We had a lot of question marks coming into the season, and the answers were all found on the scrap heap.

Dunbar was great this year, Vaughan was worth a look, who is Thomas?

 

[ravidubey]

Dallas depends on its QB, flat out, to win.

The offense is based on the QB aiming deep downfield. If no one can get open or there isn't a QB skilled enough to make those throws they are going to struggle. No matter how well the OL blocks or the RB runs. DeMarco ran for 140 yards vs Washington and Dallas still lost without Romo. McFadden for 150 against NY with the same result.

The defense is not built to take over, thanks to the gaping holes in the middle at 1-technique and safety. The linebackers are not physical. When they try to be, they get hurt. It doesn't matter if they face the worst QB in the league or the best, they produce the same results.

They need the offense.

The offense needs the QB.

It's all on one guy.

 

[townsend]

Dunbar was great this year, Vaughan was worth a look, who is Thomas?

Sorry not Thomas, Ryan Williams. Sometimes my brain misfires when remembering generic player names.

Dunbar was good. But Randle or McFadden could have filled in as a utility back without giving up a roster spot to a guy who doesn't take handoffs. The fact that we went into camp with all three RBs assured a roster spot without any kind of competition was a problem.

Now Randle has succumbed to his chronic dumbass disorder, and Dunbar's injured on account of being a wee little man. So what remains of our offense is on the hamstrings of McFadden, and a virtual unknown in Michael.

I was a huge proponent of the RBBC approach this offseason. I'm pretty much giving up on that. Linehan's offense is toothless without a bellcow.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Dallas depends on its QB, flat out, to win.

The offense is based on the QB aiming deep downfield. If no one can get open or there isn't a QB skilled enough to make those throws they are going to struggle. No matter how well the OL blocks or the RB runs. DeMarco ran for 140 yards vs Washington and Dallas still lost without Romo. McFadden for 150 against NY with the same result.

The defense is not built to take over, thanks to the gaping holes in the middle at 1-technique and safety. The linebackers are not physical. When they try to be, they get hurt. It doesn't matter if they face the worst QB in the league or the best, they produce the same results.

They need the offense.

The offense needs the QB.

It's all on one guy.

Yeah our losing has very little to do with the RB position. It's all about QB and the way our coaches have dealt with losing a QB. They are totally clueless. They have no right to bitch about Cassell either since he is the guy they hand picked to trade for.

 

[ravidubey]

Yeah our losing has very little to do with the RB position. It's all about QB and the way our coaches have dealt with losing a QB. They are totally clueless. They have no right to bitch about Cassell either since he is the guy they hand picked to trade for.

RB became much more important though with the investment in the OL. If the QB is in place, you then have to run the football because again the defense isn't built to lead the team and they need the time the running game buys them. The QB also needs the RB to back the defense off the passing game.

But yeah, the QB is much more important than the RB. Critical to the way this team wins.

 

[townsend]

Here's my fear, a lot of the problems we've been having with the backups were also there with Romo. Dink and dunk offense that can't score in the red zone. Credit to Romo for ruling at the 2 minute drill, but I have to wonder if we wouldn't still be seeing a bunch of conservative play calling and failure to test teams deep.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Here's my fear, a lot of the problems we've been having with the backups were also there with Romo. Dink and dunk offense that can't score in the red zone. Credit to Romo for ruling at the 2 minute drill, but I have to wonder if we wouldn't still be seeing a bunch of conservative play calling and failure to test teams deep.

No he wouldn't. Romo does well in the red zone but the bread and butter for the red zone this past season was the running game. The OL and RB were in sync. That is the difference in this year's group. In addition with Romo being out the offense rarely sees the red zone.

 

[p1_]

Dallas depends on its QB, flat out, to win.

The offense is based on the QB aiming deep downfield. If no one can get open or there isn't a QB skilled enough to make those throws they are going to struggle. No matter how well the OL blocks or the RB runs. DeMarco ran for 140 yards vs Washington and Dallas still lost without Romo. McFadden for 150 against NY with the same result.

The defense is not built to take over, thanks to the gaping holes in the middle at 1-technique and safety. The linebackers are not physical. When they try to be, they get hurt. It doesn't matter if they face the worst QB in the league or the best, they produce the same results.

They need the offense.

The offense needs the QB.

It's all on one guy.

Therefore, as a front office, make damn sure you value that position. Invest in it, for today and tomorrow.
Be the least bit proactive about the single most important position on the offense.

 

[JMech]

Garrett has not won a single game with a backup. I think it is something like 0-8 without Tony. Let's face it, Garrett has nothing to do with the success of this team and apparently has no ability to win without the key cog behind center. Get rid of Garrett immediately and don't wait around. Sure we don't have a remarkable backup, but that is the same at a lot of other centers where apparently the coaches are finding a way to win.

I am sick of it.

 

[mcnuttz]

Garrett has not won a single game with a backup. I think it is something like 0-8 without Tony. Let's face it, Garrett has nothing to do with the success of this team and apparently has no ability to win without the key cog behind center. Get rid of Garrett immediately and don't wait around. Sure we don't have a remarkable backup, but that is the same at a lot of other centers where apparently the coaches are finding a way to win.

I am sick of it.

Post more, seriously.

 

[Carp]

I thought Garrett went 4-5 with Kitna.

 

[townsend]

I thought Garrett went 4-5 with Kitna.

4-3 actually, since the first two Kitna losses were during the end of the Wade era.

 

[L.T. Fan]

4-3 actually, since the first two Kitna losses were during the end of the Wade era.

Garrett was interim coach for the rest of 2010.

 

[townsend]

Garrett was interim coach for the rest of 2010.

Is there a difference between interim and regular if he ended up landing the job?

 

[L.T. Fan]

Is there a difference between interim and regular if he ended up landing the job?

I am referencing Garretts record and what jmech may have been getting at with backups. Possibly he was counting the 0/8 with backups when Garrett was head coach.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Didn't Garrett also win a game with McGee?