Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Bill Barnwell: Before you call for Tony Romo's head, you should look a little closer

tr1

By tr1
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

tr1

tr1

Posted
Posted

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7052185/upon-initial-review-week-4

What's the narrative about Tony Romo sits to pee this Sunday? Over the course of four weeks, Romo sits to pee's gone from embarrassing choker to comeback artist to gritty grinder to, well, embarrassing choker again. The Cowboys blew their second big lead in four weeks on Sunday, allowing the Lions to come back via a disastrous second half, and the blame has been firmly pinned on the Dallas quarterback. He deserves better. Blame Romo sits to pee for his three interceptions, but let's make this clear: He didn't lose this game for the Cowboys.:drooley:

Let's start with the idea that Romo sits to pee somehow gifted the Lions 14 points by having two of his three interceptions returned for touchdowns. Go watch those plays again. It's one thing when a quarterback makes a terrible throw to the sideline and it gets jumped by an eager defender. That's a throw that invites a pick-six. The two interceptions that were returned for scores were both disappointing throws, but neither of them were totally on Romo sits to pee. And if you watch the returns, you'll note that Bobby Carpenter and Chris Houston run through virtually the entire Cowboys offense en route to the score. The Houston pick came on a quick slant where Laurent Robinson quit on his route. There's nothing about those interceptions that forced the Cowboys to avoid making tackles, and assigning Romo sits to pee all of the blame for those plays because the Cowboys didn't tackle is beyond unfair.:ols:

Historically, no quarterback has shown an ability to prevent pick-sixes or a propensity for consistently producing them. Even the great ones have games like that — Peyton Manning threw four interceptions and had two returned for scores by the Chargers last season. It's a fluke :drooley: that those two picks resulted in touchdowns, not a reflection on Romo sits to pee.

When the Cowboys weren't turning the ball over on offense, of course, it wasn't like Romo sits to pee was sitting at cornerback and watching Calvin Johnson and Brandon Pettigrew take over the game. During the second half, the Cowboys simply had no answer for the two Detroit star receivers, with Johnson memorably catching a Matthew Stafford lob into triple coverage in the end zone for a touchdown before later picking up the game-winner on a fade. After holding Stafford to 88 yards and an interception in the first half, the Cowboys let Stafford go 12-of-20 for 152 yards with two scores and no picks. They also had a blown coverage that left Johnson open for what would have been an easy score, only for Stafford to somehow overthrow, probably out of shock more than anything else. The same Cowboys pass rush that took over in the fourth quarter of the Redskins game in Week 3 didn't sack Stafford once all game.

Romo sits to pee deserves credit for what he did in the first half with Robinson and a gimpy Dez Bryant at receiver. With one of the league's most fearsome pass rushes staring down an inexperienced offensive line, Romo sits to pee was 19-of-24 for 195 yards with two touchdowns. At least one of the incompletions was dropped by the consistently awful Martellus Bennett. And that's all with a rib that's still cracked.

The reality is that the Cowboys could easily be 4-0 or 0-4 with a few small breaks going in either direction for them in any of their four games. Romo sits to pee has been inconsistent, a mix of big plays with some poor decision-making, injury limitations, and communication issues with his receivers. If you truly believe that Romo sits to pee is holding back the Cowboys and that they lost on Sunday because he blew the game, you're kidding yourself. He's carrying them.

---------- Post added October-6th-2011 at 05:18 AM ----------

Wow!

Romo sits to pee apologists are grounded in a different reality.

The pukes had their foot on the Lions' collective neck when they were up by 24, and Romo sits to pee's foolish decision making changed ALL of the MOMENTUM.

He's greedy when he has a lead. And, that greed leads to turnovers.

For anyone to think that loss wasn't on Romo sits to pee puts them in the category of 'blind homer.'

Unreal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Califan007 The Constipated

Califan007 The Constipated

Posted
Posted

What asinine logic lol :ols:...The fact that two of the INTs were returned for touchdowns is merely icing on the cake. If the Cowboys had indeed tackled Carpenter and Houston and the Lions still went on to score, we'd STILL be blaming Romo sits to pee for giving the Lions both a short field and momentum.

And this part is a load of ****:

And if you watch the returns, you'll note that Bobby Carpenter and Chris Houston run through virtually the entire Cowboys offense en route to the score...There's nothing about those interceptions that forced the Cowboys to avoid making tackles, and assigning Romo sits to pee all of the blame for those plays because the Cowboys didn't tackle is beyond unfair.

Chris Houston did NOT run through "virtually the entire Cowboys offense" to reach the end zone...he kept along the sideline and ran by FOUR Dallas players, tops. Everyone else on the Cowboys was either on the other side of the field or behind him. There was no bevy of missed tackles for Houston's TD. In fact, there were no missed tackles at all on his pick-6. He simply outran them. Just because you see a few Dallas jerseys in the screen doesn't mean they had a shot at tackling the guy.

And actually, Carpenter's TD was not a result of a bunch of missed tackles...it was the result of a bunch of successful blocks. Witten overshot trying to tackle Carpenter, and Bryant got wiped out by his own guy when he feebly started to attempt a tackle lol :ols:...other than that, nobody on the Cowboys even remotely had a shot at tackling Carpenter until he was right at the goal line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THEREALTOR1

THEREALTOR1

Posted
Posted

Wow, thats a great find tr1. Who is this guy? He sounds less like a professional writer and more like a 13 year old cowboys fan writing a paper for a school report.

I thought this was great:

Historically, no quarterback has shown an ability to prevent pick-sixes or a propensity for consistently producing them. Even the great ones have games like that... It's a fluke that those two picks resulted in touchdowns...

At first he does so well actually admitting the reality that they are in fact both pick-sixes (by definition), and then he turns right around in the next sentence and wants to claim its some sort of "mystery of the universe" how they resulted in a touchdown. Its easy you dumbass, your boy threw an interception to a defender who's standing just on the other side of the LOS, who the hells going to tackle him? 99% of time that carpenter ball is going to be returned for a TD. This Houston TD is a slightly different story simply because he did a great job of staying in bounds, he in no way managed to elude the cowboys offense on his way back to the endzone :doh: I'm not only beginning to think this might be a book report, but i'm also thinking this might've actually been the first football game this dude's ever watched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ACW

ACW

Posted
Posted
Usually' date=' i feel you are reaching on some of the articles you post. But this is GOLD!!!! "The reality is that the Cowboys could easily be 4-0 or 0-4 with a few small breaks going in either direction for them in any of their four games." Amazing![/quote']And isn't that true of MOST teams? :ols:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
paloosa

paloosa

Posted
Posted

WOW! What a piece of work. These guys will do anything to place the blame anywhere else except on Romo sits to pee. Sure their defense sucks but Romo sits to pee is the one that is putting them in that situation and not the lack of tackling or that the defense doesn't have an answer for the Lions WR's. It is squarely on Romo sits to pee just like they want to blame Rex Grossman for his poor decision making. Look at how many Romo sits to pee apologist blame Grossman for the same misgivings that Romo sits to pee makes. Why is Romo sits to pee any better than Grossman? Do they trust Romo sits to pee more? or Is it that Romo sits to pee plays for the Cowboys? I think it is the latter. Romo sits to pee is given this status of being on the verge of greatness label since he arrived on the scene but keeps disappointing. So when is he going to be labeled what he really is. A turnover machine or a Grossman-like player. Because in my eyes he is no different than Grossman or Favre. Both who have played for very good teams but given the benefit of the doubt unlike Grossman who took the Bears to the Super Bowl with the same type of play. A place Romo sits to pee has never been. Makes no sense and I for one see the bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Califan007 The Constipated

Califan007 The Constipated

Posted
Posted
Look who picked up on the story!!

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4684737/its-not-tony-romos-fault

"It's not Tony Romo sits to pee's fault"

Yes, ESPN! :rotflmao:

It's kinda weird, because while the title of the article is "It's not Tony Romo sits to pee's fault", the article itself actually debunks that viewpoint and basically says Barnwell's article is missing the point:

"It's not about finding fault in the interceptions, it's the decision making that bothers you with Romo sits to pee. Of course, a pick-six can be attributed to any number of people, but offensive players, specifically wide receivers and running backs, are not taught to tackle. They are taught to avoid tacklers. Quarterbacks, in some cases, elude defensive players during returns to prevent getting hurt by a big hit. Offensive linemen, in some cases, are not athletic or fast enough to chase down a defensive back. Maybe a linebacker.

Romo sits to pee's inability to protect the ball, something that is preached to him by coach Jason Garrett, is the issue here."

They should have put a question mark after the article title, imo...("It's not Tony Romo sits to pee's fault?")

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taylor4Life

Taylor4Life

Posted
Posted
Romo sits to pee apologists are grounded in a different reality.

Reporter: shouldn't you have done a better job protecting the ball in the second half?

Romo sits to pee: my teammates should have done a better job tackling after the interception!

That is so ridiculous. I cannot believe he went there, this Bill Barnwell guy is a freaking idiot!

Did he even read that line once again before he submitted the article? How about the editor, where was he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SWFLSkins

SWFLSkins

Posted
Posted

When the Cowboys weren't turning the ball over on offense, of course, it wasn't like Romo sits to pee was sitting at cornerback and watching Calvin Johnson and Brandon Pettigrew take over the game.

-This is hilarious, had Tony Turnover not done his part the two wideouts would not have been on the field. hhahahaa

Hey look here is Bill now.....barnwell_bill_m-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parsec2010

Parsec2010

Posted
Posted

Who cares. DM5 got Minnesota 3 double digit leads in the first 3 games, and guess who're they're blaiming for the collapse: Not Frazier, not the Jerred Allen lead defense, they're blaiming DM5. The media is so hypocritical. Some QB's can do no wrong in their eyes (Rivers, Romo sits to pee, Matt Ryan) The so called uber-elite QB's all have losing records in the playoffs . However if you listen to the media, you would think each of these guys won superbowls. If DM5's team loses a game it's 110% his fault.

I've never heard the media say the Chargers will never win with Rivers at QB. This guy chokes year after year despite having a team that had 2 hall of famers on offense (Gates, Tomlinson).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsFTW

SkinsFTW

Posted
Posted

I've never heard the media say the Chargers will never win with Rivers at QB. This guy chokes year after year despite having a team that had 2 hall of famers on offense (Gates, Tomlinson).

I think you are forgetting who their head coach is. It all starts and ends there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dallsux

Dallsux

Posted
Posted

First, I have to agree that this sounds like a teenager who has gotten his hands on some writing materials & let loose his homerific POV. After reading it, the only image I had running thru my head was Cartmen licking the tears off his cheeks.

Or this...

Terrell-Owens-crying.gif

I wonder if his tears for Romo sits to pee wet the pages of his report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...