Gosselin: Tony Romo needs to play perfect football for Cowboys to win

Texas Ace said:
I can't speak for everyone, but like I said, my outlook hasn't changed.

I already knew the team had solid offensive pieces, but the running game looking so good so soon is very encouraging moving forward. I could see them being 2 games better than I initially thought if they have more games like yesterday where they run the ball, grind the clock, and keep the other team off the field. But I still don't think it's enough for us to make the playoffs - too many flaws on this team and QB might just be another one to add to that list.

With that said, I sure would like to see this group with a new, young QB added to it.
Click to expand...

The majority of my comments are directed toward the preseason assessment of how the defense was going to be a complete disaster. I don't know how they will do but I didn't see how anyone could just write them off without playing a down and the lineup changes that were made.
 
L.T. Fan said:
The majority of my comments are directed toward the preseason assessment of how the defense was going to be a complete disaster. I don't know how they will do but I didn't see how anyone could just write them off without playing a down and the lineup changes that were made.
Click to expand...

If you look at the defense there is not one upgrade...so to say it would be worse is not outlandish at all. It is an assessment that makes sense.
 
L.T. Fan said:
The majority of my comments are directed toward the preseason assessment of how the defense was going to be a complete disaster. I don't know how they will do but I didn't see how anyone could just write them off without playing a down and the lineup changes that were made.
Click to expand...

The defense has looked ok through 2 games, but again, you have to view things in their proper context.

The 49ers had a 28-3 lead by halftime and had no reason to go out and press for points in the 2nd half, so I'd grade that game as an incomplete.

They did well yesterday, but Tennessee isn't exactly known as an offensive juggernaut. The real test will be New Orleans in 2 weeks.
 
Carp said:
If you look at the defense there is not one upgrade...so to say it would be worse is not outlandish at all. It is an assessment that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Right.

Seeing a defense basically make no improvements to a unit that was historically one of the worst in NFL history and thinking they'd be bad again was not some far fetched assumption.

Like I said, it's ok through 2 games but we've got a long way to go and better competition looming ahead. As L.T. like to say, we'll wait and see where they end up.
 
Texas Ace said:
Right.

Seeing a defense basically make no improvements to a unit that was historically one of the worst in NFL history and thinking they'd be bad again was not some far fetched assumption.

Like I said, it's ok through 2 games but we've got a long way to go and better competition looming ahead. As L.T. like to say, we'll wait and see where they end up.
Click to expand...

This is a case where it's fair to use past performance as a good indicator of future results, or a lack thereof.
 
Wait and see is an easy way out. You don't have to have an opinion.
 
Texas Ace said:
I can't speak for everyone, but like I said, my outlook hasn't changed.

I already knew the team had solid offensive pieces, but the running game looking so good so soon is very encouraging moving forward. I could see them being 2 games better than I initially thought if they have more games like yesterday where they run the ball, grind the clock, and keep the other team off the field. But I still don't think it's enough for us to make the playoffs - too many flaws on this team and QB might just be another one to add to that list.

With that said, I sure would like to see this group with a new, young QB added to it.
Click to expand...

Same here. The Cowboys will get in their own way.

Yesterday was an anomaly, IMO. I truly believe we have the talent up front on the OL to run the ball effectively all season. The problem is I don't think we legitimately want to play that style of football.

Garrett is always talking about how he wants to establish the running game and be physical up front but he rarely commits to the run from week to week.

Romo threw out a comment yesterday how he likes games like that and he pointed out how they've done the big passing numbers thing before and haven't got the results they'd like, so games like yesterday are great in his opinion. He says that but he's constantly checking into pass plays on clear running downs. Even when the running game is clicking and we're in a tight ball game they've chosen to go into all-pass mode.

My point is I don't trust them to continue this style of play.

One game doesn't erase 7 years of heavily unbalanced play calling and game mismanagement.

Wouldn't shock me at all to see Murray only get 15 carries next week while we attempt 45 passes in a one possession game. It's just how Romo and Garrett roll.

I'll enjoy the anomaly that I witnessed yesterday but I'm certainly not expecting them to suddenly start playing a brand of football that relied more on Murray and the RBs. They aren't wired that way.
 
I think for Romo's health, they had better call more runs than passes next week. St Louis will come after him and destroy what's left of his back.
 
Carp said:
I think for Romo's health, they had better call more runs than passes next week. St Louis will come after him and destroy what's left of his back.
Click to expand...

That's probably our best chance for seeing this renewed commitment to the running game continue.

Romo is clearly not playing well and doesn't look great physically either, and even Garrett has to notice that much. Because of that, I think we stand a good chance of seeing them lean on the running game until Romo improves......assuming he improves.
 
Carp said:
I think for Romo's health, they had better call more runs than passes next week. St Louis will come after him and destroy what's left of his back.
Click to expand...

Definitely need to say committed to the run, but on top of that they can help protect by calling shorter pass plays that develop faster than him having to sit back and wait for a deeper play to develop.
 
Between a running back who's struggled to endure a full season and Romo's broke-assed back, we're
playing with fire.
 
its a lot more simple than the columnists make it out to be. We need to be a run oriented offense in order to set up Romo for play-action/passes out of the pocket where Romo can put his touch on the offense. Not shotgun offense fade route, tacky 30 yard or more gain offense. Move the chains, slow it down and make Demarco the focal point.
 
Carp said:
Wait and see is an easy way out. You don't have to have an opinion.
Click to expand...

Having an pinion is fine as long as it is based on known information. With the defense pre season nothing was really known. There were individuals that were no longer here and replacements that hadn't played a down with Dallas. In other words there were lots of unknowns. My point was how can anyone draw an absolute conclusion based n unknowns. For me when I don't know something that it when I wait to see how it pans out. If there is sufficient information then I might venture a guess. The basis for most opinions about the Dallas' defense was based the known fact of who would not be in the lineup but zero consideration of whether the replacements might perform. In other words a conclusion based on unknowns. I had an opinion and it was there in insufficient information to make an absolute pronouncement.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Having an pinion is fine as long as it is based on known information. With the defense pre season nothing was really known. There were individuals that were no longer here and replacements that hadn't played a down with Dallas. In other words there were lots of unknowns. My point was how can anyone draw an absolute conclusion based n unknowns. For me when I don't know something that it when I wait to see how it pans out. If there is sufficient information then I might venture a guess. The basis for most opinions about the Dallas' defense was based the known fact of who would not be in the lineup but zero consideration of whether the replacements might perform. In other words a conclusion based on unknowns. I had an opinion and it was there in insufficient information to make an absolute pronouncement.
Click to expand...

It is very easy to draw conclusions when your top 3 defensive players are gone from a season ago, but not one was replaced by a more talented player. So it is very easy to make the assumption that the defense would be worse this year and is not some outlandish projection. If we did not make projections and predictions around here then it would be just a bunch of people shrugging their shoulders saying wait and see.
 
Carp said:
It is very easy to draw conclusions when your top 3 defensive players are gone from a season ago, but not one was replaced by a more talented player. So it is very easy to make the assumption that the defense would be worse this year and is not some outlandish projection. If we did not make projections and predictions around here then it would be just a bunch of people shrugging their shoulders saying wait and see.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with folks making predictions or having opinions. As you say that is what this board is about. What I challenged wasn't whether it was an opinion that the defense could be worse rather an absolute pronouncement that it would be worse with no exception. To me there is a difference in having an opinion and making emphatic statement to be utilized as fact. Those were the positions I challenged as being knee jerk and unreasonable. If your position was an opinion fine but if your position was an absolute pronouncement, well I took issue with it.
 
Carp said:
but not one was replaced by a more talented player. So it is very easy to make the assumption that the defense would be worse this year and is not some outlandish projection. If we did not make projections and predictions around here then it would be just a bunch of people shrugging their shoulders saying wait and see.
Click to expand...

Nothing outlandish assuming the defense could be worse but I'd dispute the notion that the talent is worse on defense this year. We are much deeper overall on the defensive line this year. McClain on the field is better then a Sean Lee injured and sitting out which he did a lot of last year. Plus I don't think there is any question that Marinelli is an upgrade as defensive coordinator.

I think the preseason had a lot of people feeling extra down about this team. The problem was we didn't really play a lot of guys during preseason.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Nothing outlandish assuming the defense could be worse but I'd dispute the notion that the talent is worse on defense this year. We are much deeper overall on the defensive line this year. McClain on the field is better then a Sean Lee injured and sitting out which he did a lot of last year. Plus I don't think there is any question that Marinelli is an upgrade as defensive coordinator.

I think the preseason had a lot of people feeling extra down about this team. The problem was we didn't really play a lot of guys during preseason.
Click to expand...

Before the season started...if you said you are going to replace Ware, Hatcher, and Lee with Lawrence, Melton, and McClain there is no question in my mind that it is a talent downgrade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom