Sports Science Reviews the Romo Pick

[Smitty]

How is that any worse than saying people that don't agree with you are either a blind homer or retarded? Or whatever other combination suits the moment. You and some others use that one quite frequently.

Right Ace?

We're all the same.

 

[p1_]

I think that it's certainly true that Romo could have made a safer decision on that play. Clearly the pass to Murray was the safer call.

That being said, if the short pass to Murray had ended in another short pass, and then a punt we would have lost.

From what I saw, Murray might still be running had he gotten that pass. There was some real estate open in front of him.

 

[townsend]

And? This is so reminiscent of the Seattle game rhetoric, it is comical. Oh yeah? Didn't really matter and stuff because, well, Alexander ran over Roy Williams and they like ran out the clock...not accountable!

We do not know that for certainty. Is it probable and very likely, sure. But the only thing factual was what happened prior to that. And that was Romo's mistake...which amazingly, even after days of rumination, people still won't even admit it was a bad decision.

Had he made the right decision, Romo would be hailed as a hero right now instead of the goat and the result is the same. A Loss. And that is all that matters.

This week, we'd have been nailing Kiffin to the wall, but you know what, there would be excuses there too. We lost the game.

The game was lost regardless as Denver was the better team. The question strictly turns if we should be impressed that we looked better and if that translates to the future...which honestly, only a fool feels extremely confident that it does.



But we didn't have that defense.

That's the general point. Romo had this game where it was because he was balls to the wall. Normally, he's not. I can all but guarantee you this was his finest 58 minutes of football in his career and he will never duplicate it again. It is just tragic he fell into a habit in the last two minutes.

When it got down to the point where it was tied and we needed to win it, he took it upon himself to think he could be the hero. And usually when he makes these kind of heartbreaking mistakes, it is because he feels he has to.

It is like a maestro conducting a magnificent concerto up until the end of the piece and then he sneezes to screw everything up. What's a problem is that he's sneezed before. Multiple times. Do you blame the orchestra for the ruined experience?

He does not know how to throttle back late in tight games with high stakes and play sound situational football.

He gets suckered into plays that often he would not make at other times and it is often by players that quite honestly, aren't going to be making Pro Bowls anytime soon. Rob Jackson and Danny Trevathan are ham and eggers that suddenly people want to credit making miracle plays off of poor victim Tony. How come these two guys will probably never have plays like this again the rest of their careers? Was it just luck? According to some people, I guess it is.

Right or wrong, the only way he sheds this reputation is to have games where he moves with the ebb and flow instead of being the ebb and flow personally.

Whether people will admit it or not, at the end of the day, we lost that game was because of the INT. It set them up, without question, with the game winning points.




Again, irrelevant on the scoreboard.

I'm on a phone right now, so forgive me for not seperating out your quotes. I promise I'm not trying to ignore your points and jam back a response without reading them.

I agree with you fundamentally, Romo isn't as good as he needed to be to win us the game, more so if he had been THAT good in previous years (2007 and 2008 especially) he'd have a playoff record that is far less lopsided.

In truth though this game was a microcosm of Romo's entire career. We lost that game because we sucked. Maestro managed to hum his way through the most of the song and sneezed. Maybe if the orchestra had shown up with their instruments it'd have worked, maybe if we had a Maestro with just as good humming skills and less seasonal allergies it'd have been fine.

As I've mentioned before, Romo's had his moments before, and honestly he could have won this game with the walk away TD and it wouldn't have meant very much. Just another "yeah but" like 09 New Orleans or 2011 49ers. I promise you the next INT he threw would be a "typical Romo play" and they'd be wondering where the guy who beat the Broncos goes in December.

So this is the crux of my point. Romo's flawed, he pushes too hard in shoot outs, what happened Sunday was surely a best case scenario for making a second tier QB sling it all day.

However our pain as fans isn't caused by Romo choking. It's by the fact that he's constantly in a position to choke. Mark Sanchez, Phillip Rivers, Alex Smith, and Joe Flacco aren't better than Romo, but they've made deep playoff runs because they were part of a good team.

Playoff calbur teams (except the Packers, maybe) don't ever plan on the QB willing himself down the field every week in the closing minutes with a predictable offense and no running game.

No wonder we struggle down the stretch, when our gameplan is so frequently "wing it". I'm guessing that gets sniffed out towards the end of the season.

 

[boozeman]

I agree with you fundamentally, Romo isn't as good as he needed to be to win us the game, more so if he had been THAT good in previous years (2007 and 2008 especially) he'd have a playoff record that is far less lopsided.

I think he wasn't this good because this was really the outlier for his career. He's pimped out before, often in fact, but never like this. For that reason, I guess I understand why people feel the need to defend his crucial miscue, because it seems wasteful to discount the other 58 minutes. Even though I believe he cost us the game ultimately doesn't mean I don't marvel at what he did before that. I also think that his performance is something he has never and will never duplicate again. So his game Sunday does not have any impact on our future this year or any year, any more than some people think his INT was irrelevant to the outcome because he was the reason we were in it.

In truth though this game was a microcosm of Romo's entire career. We lost that game because we sucked. Maestro managed to hum his way through the most of the song and sneezed. Maybe if the orchestra had shown up with their instruments it'd have worked, maybe if we had a Maestro with just as good humming skills and less seasonal allergies it'd have been fine.

I slightly disagree. I recall the NY Jets opener two years ago. He was having a great game. Not shredding Rex's D, but certainly having us in a good place. Then he fumbles at the goalline and then throws the pick to Revis. Game over. He was tearing up the Lions before tossing a reckless pass to his buddy Bobby Carpenter to start the landslide loss to Detroit. Contrary to what people say, this was not his finest moment. SF with the walk off pass to Mr. 4th and Long was the best. Even if the orchestra has been missing pieces he's still been very good at times only to screw up at the end. Thing is, the orchestra will always be missing pieces. It is inevitable. I don't see how you can complain that he's missing pieces for 58 minutes and use that as an excuse for the final two. He's one of the pieces too, the most important part. As he goes, so do the Cowboys. It is how everything is structured, especially with the contractual backing he has now. He's the man. And to be the man, he has to avoid making this kind of play that makes the team lose. He's not the first QB to get into a shootout where nobody could stop the other team. Those games happen.

As I've mentioned before, Romo's had his moments before, and honestly he could have won this game with the walk away TD and it wouldn't have meant very much. Just another "yeah but" like 09 New Orleans or 2011 49ers. I promise you the next INT he threw would be a "typical Romo play" and they'd be wondering where the guy who beat the Broncos goes in December.

If he walked off the field a winner Sunday with no pickoff, people would be hanging from his nuts. I also think he'd be sky high. Maybe it would have been a boost to his confidence and shatter the mental block he seems to go into occasionally when the chips are down late. Who knows. But I doubt it wouldn't have meant much. He'd have gained a peg on critics and then the noise about choking would stop...you don't shatter an all time record and not have it change your rep a little.

So this is the crux of my point. Romo's flawed, he pushes too hard in shoot outs, what happened Sunday was surely a best case scenario for making a second tier QB sling it all day.

However our pain as fans isn't caused by Romo choking. It's by the fact that he's constantly in a position to choke. Mark Sanchez, Phillip Rivers, Alex Smith, and Joe Flacco aren't better than Romo, but they've made deep playoff runs because they were part of a good team.

They also were part of teams that felt like that...a team. Romo has always been the one, or at least felt he had to be the one, who had to play well for the team to win. Part of that is the weaker team, but a lot of that is how things are structured. No running game, a lack of creativity/discipline/focus on his defenses, bad special teams. But the real problem is that we have been good enough to win if Bad Tony shows up. Nobody, including, Romo though, believes that. And it is made worse when he does make that mistake because they have that mindset, we live and die by Romo. That's not fair to him. And I think he feels it and reacts accordingly when he has to win the game.

Playoff calbur teams (except the Packers, maybe) don't ever plan on the QB willing himself down the field every week in the closing minutes with a predictable offense and no running game.

No wonder we struggle down the stretch, when our gameplan is so frequently "wing it". I'm guessing that gets sniffed out towards the end of the season.

I doubt we see it consistently enough to get sniffed out. We are more likely to see the KC game offense this week as we will the Bronco game offense. Washington will blitz him mercilessly. And as we saw in KC, he will underperform. I just don't get why people are so eager to think we can replicate Sunday. It was an all-timer.

 

[NoDak]

Lookit booze, channeling his inner schmitty.

Breaking down posts and churning out novellas.

 

[boozeman]

Lookit booze, channeling his inner schmitty.

Breaking down posts and churning out novellas.

Lookit NoDak channeling his inner superpunk with the snarky two liners.

 

[townsend]

I think he wasn't this good because this was really the outlier for his career. He's pimped out before, often in fact, but never like this. For that reason, I guess I understand why people feel the need to defend his crucial miscue, because it seems wasteful to discount the other 58 minutes. Even though I believe he cost us the game ultimately doesn't mean I don't marvel at what he did before that. I also think that his performance is something he has never and will never duplicate again. So his game Sunday does not have any impact on our future this year or any year, any more than some people think his INT was irrelevant to the outcome because he was the reason we were in it.

I agree, pretty much completely. I don't anticipate another game this perfect. The closest (versus real competition) I've seen, is the 2011 'lost in the lights' game, and I thought 2011 Romo was already long gone.

I slightly disagree. I recall the NY Jets opener two years ago. He was having a great game. Not shredding Rex's D, but certainly having us in a good place. Then he fumbles at the goalline and then throws the pick to Revis. Game over. He was tearing up the Lions before tossing a reckless pass to his buddy Bobby Carpenter to start the landslide loss to Detroit. Contrary to what people say, this was not his finest moment. SF with the walk off pass to Mr. 4th and Long was the best. Even if the orchestra has been missing pieces he's still been very good at times only to screw up at the end. Thing is, the orchestra will always be missing pieces. It is inevitable. I don't see how you can complain that he's missing pieces for 58 minutes and use that as an excuse for the final two. He's one of the pieces too, the most important part. As he goes, so do the Cowboys. It is how everything is structured, especially with the contractual backing he has now. He's the man. And to be the man, he has to avoid making this kind of play that makes the team lose. He's not the first QB to get into a shootout where nobody could stop the other team. Those games happen.

I was really hoping you were going to say, to be the man, he'd have to beat the man. I'd say the worst game of Tony's career had to be versus Pittsburg in 2008. If there's one game that distills every criticism leveled against Romo it's his late choke/meltdown in a crucial game, against a good/hated team. I hate to read straight from the Romo aplologist playbook, but I figure most 2nd tier QBs have shitty games like this. Obviously Eli does. Even Peyton has had his share of Meltdowns. I'm not saying it isn't really freaking frustrating, I just think it's gonna happen, especially with our questionable offensive setup.

We've struggled in shootouts over the years. Actually for a really long time Romo throwing over 40 times meant we were absolutely gonna lose. Some of that is Romo's failures, we've also struggled mightily with clock management, which can't help. Also we love to commit penalties and kill drives in the clutch too. Also in shootouts, the last team to hold the ball usually wins, so you're already down to a 50-50 chance at best.

If he walked off the field a winner Sunday with no pickoff, people would be hanging from his nuts. I also think he'd be sky high. Maybe it would have been a boost to his confidence and shatter the mental block he seems to go into occasionally when the chips are down late. Who knows. But I doubt it wouldn't have meant much. He'd have gained a peg on critics and then the noise about choking would stop...you don't shatter an all time record and not have it change your rep a little.

It might change things a little, but this team is not going to see success in the playoffs. Doesn't this argument sound familiar to you?
"Yeah he can put up a lot of stats, but we're not talking about a fantasy league here, real quarterbacks win when it counts."
Hell in 2004 Peyton Manning threw 49 TDs and still got shut down by New England. I remember him getting a pretty big backlash from that (not on a Romo scale, but Peyton is generally well liked).

They also were part of teams that felt like that...a team. Romo has always been the one, or at least felt he had to be the one, who had to play well for the team to win. Part of that is the weaker team, but a lot of that is how things are structured. No running game, a lack of creativity/discipline/focus on his defenses, bad special teams. But the real problem is that we have been good enough to win if Bad Tony shows up. Nobody, including, Romo though, believes that. And it is made worse when he does make that mistake because they have that mindset, we live and die by Romo. That's not fair to him. And I think he feels it and reacts accordingly when he has to win the game.

This. This is what happens when your coach isn't a coach. If Romo had a Parcells, Holmgren, Harbaugh (either), or even a Gruden to step up and tell him what to do, and put together a team; instead of making every game the Romo show, starring Romo. We'd probably see a lot less spectacular (meaning one that causes a spectacle) Romo. Parcells clearly had the worst incarnation of Romo (It was the worst incarnation of Parcells too), and managed to get to the playoffs with him. Because things like time of possession, and "keeping a defense honest" were part of his game plan. Sure he had a habit of putting Marcus Spears at full back three times before attempting a field goal, but at least our offense wasn't boom or bust, and our defense got some decent time off the field.

I doubt we see it consistently enough to get sniffed out. We are more likely to see the KC game offense this week as we will the Bronco game offense. Washington will blitz him mercilessly. And as we saw in KC, he will underperform. I just don't get why people are so eager to think we can replicate Sunday. It was an all-timer.

Could be. I was kind of going off of what we saw through most of 2012. Which was tons of 4th quarter rallies or attempted rallies. Honestly after watching the Chiefs game I thought Romo might be done, it looked like he was suffering from Brad Johnsonitis. He could barely sling the ball across the line of scrimmage. I'm hoping that it was a side affect of his bruised ribs.

 

[Deuce]

Lookit booze, channeling his inner schmitty.

Breaking down posts and churning out novellas.

Lookit NoDak channeling his inner superpunk with the snarky two liners.

Oh snap, there's about to be some furniture moving up in this mf'er.

 

[ravidubey]

Ask yourself... Can a QB be held responsible for being hit as he throws a pass he'd normally connect?

The pass itself was not risky, but the playcall was. The Denver defense stop respecting the run and the resulting bullrush screwed up Romo's pass. He didn't make a bad decision-- that was made by whomever called the 17th pass play in a row and had the Broncos defense' ears peeled back.

 

[dallen]

Ask yourself... Can a QB be held responsible for being hit as he throws a pass he'd normally connect?

The pass itself was not risky, but the playcall was. The Denver defense stop respecting the run and the resulting bullrush screwed up Romo's pass. He didn't make a bad decision-- that was made by whomever called the 17th pass play in a row and had the Broncos defense' ears peeled back.

It was the perfect time to catch them on a draw. 16 pass plays in a row, 2nd and long, the 2 minute warning coming up....

 

[boozeman]

Ask yourself... Can a QB be held responsible for being hit as he throws a pass he'd normally connect?

The pass itself was not risky, but the playcall was. The Denver defense stop respecting the run and the resulting bullrush screwed up Romo's pass. He didn't make a bad decision-- that was made by whomever called the 17th pass play in a row and had the Broncos defense' ears peeled back.

Ask yourself this...can a QB be held responsible to slide in the pocket to avoid a rush to give himself a better throwing lane? Yes. And that's what Romo failed to do...that and simply check down to Murray. We all know Romo loves his spin to the left, it wasn't there, he ultimately had the responsibility for making the play. The pass was risky is he did not take steps to give himself a better chance to complete it. He rushed it, stepped on Smith's foot...that's on him.

 

[NoDak]

Lookit NoDak channeling his inner superpunk with the snarky two liners.

~wipes tear~

 

[superpunk]

Lookit NoDak channeling his inner superpunk with the snarky two liners.

At least you're thinking about me.

ya'll mothafuckas is trollin'

 

[L.T. Fan]

~wipes tear~

Laughs loudly.

 

[ravidubey]

Ask yourself this...can a QB be held responsible to slide in the pocket to avoid a rush to give himself a better throwing lane? Yes. And that's what Romo failed to do...that and simply check down to Murray. We all know Romo loves his spin to the left, it wasn't there, he ultimately had the responsibility for making the play. The pass was risky is he did not take steps to give himself a better chance to complete it. He rushed it, stepped on Smith's foot...that's on him.

Smith backed into him just as he was stepping up and throwing and it's all happening under two seconds. There's no time to pull back. This kind of thing happens all the time. If a QB follows through on a pass and bangs his hand on a helmet, is he at fault for missing the next two games because he didn't pull back to avoid a "risky" throw?

By this standard every throw in the NFL is a risk. In the final game last year Romo made a bad decision because he was fooled when a LB he thought was rushing backed into coverage. This Denver interception happened because he couldn't follow through on his pass, something he couldn't have known was going to happen when he started his throwing motion.

 

[Cotton]

Tony Romo on his teammates' support this week: We believe in each other

Tony Romo didn't hear anything but positive comments this week. That's because he was only listening to his teammates.

The Cowboys have made it clear all week that they have Romo's back, something he said he appreciates.

"We are a close-knit group," Romo said Thursday. "More than anything, I trust those guys. I know they trust me. We have been doing it a long time. You gain trust and respect through your work ethic, your production and commitment. We have a bunch of guys in this locker room who bring it every day, so I have their back the entire time. All the things that come about during a season, there are going to be moments, but we believe in each other. It's a good thing."

Romo threw for a team-record 506 yards and five touchdowns against the Broncos, but his lone interception, which came with 1:57 remaining, allowed Denver to kick the game-winning field goal on the final play.

"Well, the great thing about sports is you get to compete," Romo said, "and you don’t always succeed and you don’t always fail. The thing about it that’s great is that you've just got to keep getting better, and if you keep getting better, eventually you’ll achieve your goals or give yourself the best chance to do that. To me, that’s the mantra for our football team over and over again: Just keep getting better. When the football team and when everyone collectively comes together, then you’ll be able to do what you want to."

Dez Bryant said there is only one reason Romo has taken the criticism he has this week.

"Because he’s got the star on his helmet," Bryant said Thursday. "There’s no question it’s been going on a long time. Even when I was in college, you know, I used to hear things. And I always thought Tony was a great quarterback, and he still is to this day. He’s a leader. He’s the leader of our football team. As soon as things go right, everybody will be praising him [again]."

Romo ranks second in the NFL with a 114.3 rating. He has 13 touchdowns and two interceptions.

-- Charean Williams

 

[Tony D]

Time to move on. Let it go. Redskins this Sunday.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Time to move on. Let it go. Redskins this Sunday.

Agreed.

 

[Rev]

Agreed.

Nope

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Nope

Maybe