There's always room to become a Colts fan.
I was keeping an eye on the qb's this weekend and one thing I noticed about Sanchez, Rivers, and Romo...they all suck.
Neither are good at faking, looking off receivers, or going to 2nd or 3rd options, especially in crunch time. They look to their #1 guy and that's it...it works or it doesn't, and there is little if any analysis in the middle of a play when needed. That also makes it easier for defenses to bet on where they are going.
They can each throw the ball tho and will make their share of completions based on qb/receiver talent and play calling etc., but neither have a very high level of clutch ability, and I believe that's probably part of the reason why.
Manning and Favre are the exact opposite (I didn't pay attention to Brees.) They work deception as part of their approach (Manning the best), and that also helps them get to the 2nd or 3rd option more effectively when needed. Often its useless window dressing, but often it probably makes a difference...and that can be just the separation they need to make a completion or recover a broken play.
Damn right ! You didn't notice ?
They lost to the Jets! yeah - the Jets.
Choke Chargers - maybe they could step up in coaching and get Zorn.
Manning and Favre are the exact opposite (I didn't pay attention to Brees.) They work deception as part of their approach (Manning the best), and that also helps them get to the 2nd or 3rd option more effectively when needed. Often its useless window dressing, but often it probably makes a difference...and that can be just the separation they need to make a completion or recover a broken play.
Heh, they could pull the coup of the century and get Jimmy Johnson out of retirement. He can coach the shit out of anything.
I don't know about Sanchez or Rivers, but yeah Romo is terrible. He is only as good as his offensive line holding perfect. If he gets *ANY* pressure, he either throws it away, or throws an INT. That's just unacceptable in the NFL.
Aikman was similar in a way, with a couple of MAJOR differences though. Aikman wasn't great out of the pocket in the way that Elway or Montana (two of the best ever IMHO) were, but Aikman had a better arm, and an almost unbreakable calm. The guy just didn't throw it if it wasn't there, and if the right place was 40 yards downfield between the numbers, that's where it went. Of course, if the line didn't hold, that wasn't gonna happen very often, but protect him and he's a fantastic QB, fluster him and he won't throw an easy INT.
Romo could be decent, if he took some Zen courses or something to keep his head from getting clouded. It's easy for me to criticize, me not having to deal with 280lb linebackers sprinting with blood fury with alarming frequency, but he's in the NFL, he's supposed to be one of the best QB's on earth. He could also get some better footwork/mobility.
If Romo would understand the need to get an edge any way he can, ie faking, looking off, spreading the wealth, etc., he'd make it a helluva lot easier imo. Being calm is critical but they have to be smart too. Its tough when the qb is chased right after the snap, but it's more complicated than that.
If a qb is predictable, the opponent can stack the defense one way or another while at the same time send more people to pressure the qb. When a qb doesn't try to hide his cards while spreading the wealth in who he looks for during a game, he becomes more predictable and weakens his chance for success.
Getting sacked then becomes much more than just a product of an apparent weak offensive line.
Aikman and Montana were smart qb's and their demeanor let them use their talent and intelligence under pressure. I'd be inclined to think Romo and Rivers are just morons with a lot of talent.
Sanchez on the other hand is a rookie and at this point in his career deserves credit for simply being a starter and leading his team to a playoff win imo, but he's naturally needs to keep growing.
I like that assessment.
I think Romo needs to go. He has shown that if things are going perfectly, he can be a good QB, but outside of that he's terrible. He's utterly useless if things go wrong, no adaptability, he gets wonky and starts throwing INTs, misses open receivers, etc. It's pretty unlikely that a line could be built that was as dominant as in '92-'96, and I think that's the only way he'd ever stand a chance is to have that kind of near-total protection.
We need someone like a Manning, Aikman, Elway, Favre, that kind of caliber, or Dallas is just going to keep going exactly like this, barely getting to the playoffs and then either losing immediately or right after.
In my humble opinion Romo is the last person that deserves blame for the team's performance. The dude got raped up and down the field. God damn Joe Montana cyborg clone could not have saved the Cowboys.
You haven't seen a QB that can run and throw before?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scp_9ZJX1z0
Elway never really had a great team around him in the old days either. Flush him out of the pocket and he'll rush for the 1st down, or throw a running completion across the field.
Even McNabb is better at mobility, or at least he was, he's getting pretty old now. I'd still take McNabb over Romo 10 days a week though.
I hear what you're saying. The way I saw the game unfold he didn't have many opportunities to successfully scramble. The Vikings had guys all over the place in the backfield.
I am no fan of the Cowboys, but eventually you want to see the guys put it together and play consistently at the level they're capable of. It would suck big time if you're right about Romo. He's been in the league long enough to know what big games are about.
It's hard to point the finger and know what the hell the Cowboys are doing wrong when they completely broke down on every level. Seriously what in the seven hells happened to the team that played so well at the end of the season. It's hard for me to believe the Eagles are so bad that they made a shitty Cowboys team look like a real contender for the throne.
I was getting pretty tired of hearing about how the Cowboys drove down the field so easily on their first two drives of the game (even though they come up empty handed)...
Do teams normally show their 'best' stuff at the beginning of the game? or do they 'hold' back to a degree to see what the other team does (who might also be holding back)? or do you go full all out from the 1st snap? it this strategy any different for a playoff vs a non-playoff game?
I heard alot of the 'the Cowboys should have moved the ball like they did the first two drives'...would that have really made a difference?
I was getting pretty tired of hearing about how the Cowboys drove down the field so easily on their first two drives of the game (even though they come up empty handed)...
Do teams normally show their 'best' stuff at the beginning of the game? or do they 'hold' back to a degree to see what the other team does (who might also be holding back)? or do you go full all out from the 1st snap? it this strategy any different for a playoff vs a non-playoff game?
I heard alot of the 'the Cowboys should have moved the ball like they did the first two drives'...would that have really made a difference?
Romo didn't lose that game, at all.
Rivers didn't lose that game, at all.
.....fucking kickers lost those games.
I'm not going to expound a treatise about this right now, because everyone knows this.