As usual, I post the notes I took while watching the game. Really, the game basically boils down to a few plays; the offenses looked horrible for both sides (or the defenses were great, who knows) and the game came down to really two plays; Brandon Marshall's catch-n-run and the Anthony Spencer INT for a touchdown that somehow didn't happen. The Dallas defense really should have dominated this game, even more so than Denver's, but when they have a chance to make that drive-killing interception, they can't.


1) The Broncos' defensive gameplan looked remarkably similar to Carolina's; jam up the A and B gaps with blitzes, and force the Cowboys to run wide. Carolina ultimately failed because of Felix Jones, but Denver had no such worries. The Cowboys had some success burning Denver with screens, but eventually went away from it even though Denver kept blitzing. Their outside runs didn't do terribly well when they tried, and eventually they ditched that too.

2) Anthony Spencer, from team MVP to goat of Dallas - If I counted it up, I believe Spencer has probably hit the quarterback more than anybody on the team. He also has let 4 passes go in and out of his hands that were easy interceptions. So far you can count on Spencer to do 2 things: 1) hit the quarterback just after he lets go of the ball, and 2) let passes sail through his hands.

3) Whatever troubles Romo had, Orton was actually worse. Sometimes it pays to be lucky, and that was true in this case; I counted at least 4 times Orton threw a bad pass that should have been picked, but remarkably wasn't.

4) The Dallas receivers just aren't doing well. None are going to hot routes on blitzes. During the 3rd period I saw the two inside receivers run the same route, heading into each other; the same thing happened again on the last play of the game when Hurd and Crayton ran slants into each other. Austin's route into coverage instead of to the sideline got Romo yet another pick. Many times Romo had to wait for receivers even to look his way during blitzes.

5) If referees are going to nitpick the 'defenseless receiver' penalty ( as they did in the NY/KC game), then where were they on the hit to defenseless Roy Williams' breadbasket?

6) The refs started out well, and were pretty spot on for a sloppy first half. During the 2nd half they spent quite a bit of time seeing things that weren't there (Marty B's holding, Tony Scheffler's off. PI).

7) We got our money's worth with Brooking, and he's a valuable upgrade over Zach Thomas.

8) For two games, or defense was terrible, but the offense was hot. For two more, the defense has been very good while the offense is stuck in neutral. This team needs to find a happy medium.

9) Speaking of happy medium, who else thinks that this team is still reeling a bit from the criticism after the Giants game? Pundits shouted for the Cowboys to adopt a more conservative approach and not put the ball in jeopardy. Romo started eating sacks and very rarely fires downfield. Witten is staying in to block. The shifting formations and moving wideouts around to get better matchups are gone. I expect now pundits will want to go back to the way things were.

10) Two aspects of the team are missing that are really want to see more of. First, I think I'd like to see Wade blitz more with the secondary, which seems to work well for every team we face. Second, Dallas needs to start using their tight ends has a focal point of the offense.

You have made some good observations of the game, and seem to be right with your analysis.

Spencer might have bad hands (I will stipulate to that fact), but his pass coverage ability makes Newman look like an undrafted free agent from Eastern Illinois. Yes, he hasn't made a play yet with his hands but he's been in position in coverage every time to make plays. That's much more than can be said about Newman.

Newman's pick last week was the ultimate "look what I found" moment. For him to whine about Marshall allegedly grabbing his jersey (I didnt see his jersey being grabbed), was telling about his character. He got burned again, when it counted the most, and couldn't own up to it.

I couldn't see anything but quite a bit of hand-checking myself. Newman was in position, but just couldn't outjump Marshall. I thought Hamlin's horrible attempt at a tackle to be more offending than Newman. Actually, Newman had a decent day until this play happened - Marshall hadn't been killing us.

I just think that us Cowboys' fans are the only ones who truly believe Newman is our best. He sure gets picked on quite a bit for me to believe teams are afraid of him. I just think, over the course of his entire career, he has been a major underachiever. He seems to get way too many PI calls.

I thought Newman had pretty good coverage. It was the YAC that killed the Cowboys. You would think 5 defenders
could hem the guy in. But it was an outstanding play by Marshall for sure.

But, I'll also agree that Newman has underachieved. But that is a awfully big club on this team.

I didn't say it well enough earlier. Newman's speed and agility allows him to stay close to receivers. My problem with him, though, is he never makes a play when we need it. Last week's pick six was a gift from Delhomme. Had Delhomme read Smith's route, Newman would've been beaten again.

And to hear him complain yesterday about Marshall grabbing his jersey, was just too much.

1) According to KC Joyner's research, when healthy, Newman is quite good...his career YPC Against is around 7 or 8, which is very good.

The worst thing Newman's ever done is try and play injured. That's when he's terrible.

However...this year Newman hasn't started off well, but his last two games were better than his first two, easily.

2) Delhomme does read Smith's route, because Smith has an option when reading his coverage at the top of 5 yards. Apparently, it's either a fly route or slant. Smith reads Newman outside and runs slant; this is what Delhomme reads. During the slant, Smith changes his mind once Newman gets alongside him and abandons his route for the fly, but by then Delhomme is throwing and Newman ends up with the gift.

Once Smith makes his decision, he has to stay with it. Neither interception was Delhomme's fault.

Let me get this straight .... an interception can be someone else's fault besides the QB??? Hmmmm...

^ just ask miles austin.

The complaining was disappointing. I've seen the replay and there was nothing there. He engaged the receiver and didn't disrupt his route. He should have kept his mouth shut.

How many times did you have to run that on Madden to come up with that hypothesis? Or, maybe you were in Carolina's Monday meetings after that game? Either way....good work.

If Newman is so good, why does he keep showing up on my TV week after week running behind the guy he's assigned to cover? The only thing he's been good at this year is PI penalties.

If you took the time to learn these answers for yourself, you could have saved yourself an hour typing this.

I try to learn aspects of the game where I can. There are many, many good books on the concept of passing. Several can tell you alot on how pass patterns work and how quarterbacks read these patterns. Reading corners, safeties, middle of the field (whether MOFC or MOFO)...

You may even find some pretty good sites on football if you just keep at this whole internet thing.

I also try to watch the game when I find the time. Maybe this didn't occur to you. If you have a DVR it makes things easier to see causation. A VCR works pretty well too.

If you're as football smart as you think you are, do us all a favor and go replace Wade. Lord knows you couldn't be any worse. And take SpaceGolfer with you. Romo needs a shoulder to cry on. When he's not crying, I'm sure you and SpaceGolfer can prop him up emotionally by telling him how well he looks statistically. Maybe then we can all get the QB our Cowboys deserve.

You'll have to explain to my how being insulting makes your point. I'm guessing if you've already sunk to this point, you haven't thought much of this through.

I'll go back to debating THSfanatic and Ram.

My response is no more insulting than your incessant need to rely on stats to defend everything regarding the Cowboys. If you have it all figured out with your statistical analysis and research, then you should go and provide your services to the club. It's obvious they need all the help they can get right now.

If you find that insulting, that's a YOU problem.

How is my attempt to make a coherent argument insulting to you? In what reality you live in is this possible?

Let's skip the fact that I didn't put on rose-colored glasses in my review to begin with; the only way I could be insulting you to get my point across is if I threw away any actual examples or historical context of my argument, used name-calling and was condescending to try and steer attention away from such a flaccid and silly rationalization.

But if I did that, I'd be copying you.

So if this is the best you can do, let your parents back on the computer and go study for your tests.

I guess I'm a little confused as to where YOUR opinions are anymore valid than mine. Unless your getting a check from the Dallas Cowboys that is in any way, payment for your scouting or coaching analysis for their team then your opinion is just as useless as mine. So if you are getting paid then my apologies for doubting your expert opinion. Even if I disagree. Just let me know when you need help fixing your problem then.

Do I really have to respond to your inability to combine reading with comprehension??

Plenty of other people have posted in this thread alluding to the fact that your opinion on Romo is worthless, but I don't have the pleasure of being one of those.

I did imply that your are a Romo apologist and there's no doubt about that. You're guilty as charged.

BIG BAD BLACK CAT (my best attempt at not hurting your feelings further)

I, for one, was extremely insulted by the fact that you defend Romo blindly by propping up your opinions with STATS. Until they come up with a stat that empirically defines the quality of his "heart," then STATS don't really matter.

You're rose-colored glasses reference couldn't be more wrong. It's so wrong, you should have them change your screen name to RoseColoredGlasses.

Whether you care to believe it or not, I'm not a Cowboys/Romo basher. I've just gotten to the point that results matter the most. I couldn't care less about STATS, unless it begins with # of WINS. And yes, young Anthony isn't the sole reason they win or lose but he's the major reason (normally) that they win or lose.

Like it or not, its a win now league. Other teams are winning with young and inexperienced QBs. Why can't the Cowboys?

Because Romo is terrible. Yes, terrrrrrrrible!!!!

I'm insulted you would say that.

So you DO admit you're insulted by pesky empirical evidence that destroys your argument?

Wouldn't this be a YOU problem?

Stats aren't some gremlin that pops out of nowhere to trash your narrow-focused anger over a short time frame. Maybe we can't quantify Romo's "heart" from a television set, but we can constitute data in meaningful ways that show how Romo's play can be put in perspective. We know that Romo makes far more good plays than bad. If he didn't, he wouldn't be putting up the third best YPA of all time. We also know that when the game is within 7 points in the 4th quarter, Romo's passer rating is ten points higher than his career average. Would this qualify has "heart" to you?

You don't want a stat for heart. You want a crystal ball.

Until then, you can keep making my point for me!

That passer rating and $.75 will get him a coke. Who cares about his YPA, TBA, CPA, HECK GPA. Romo still chokes when the game is on the line.

My reading comprehension is just great. Your inability to understand logic with seeing and numbers is your own loss. As a coach you would not be able to put your team in the best position to win without using the stats or "numbers". They would laugh you out of town. If you would like we could argue some great stats with other QB's. There are others out there with great numbers. It's not just Romo. You are the one that can overlook skills to get a team somewhere. Reality is not that way. Romo shows everything you need in a QB. He has the drive, attitude, heart and skills. That is why he is the QB for the Cowboys now. His abilities in these areas got him there. Good thing all the other teams don't listen to you. Both Mannings would be out of the NFL by now. Favre would be gone long ago. Numerous others out there would not have lasted.

Just face it... you have no clue about team concept. Otherwise you might be able to see just a little what is going on.

Now, I'm really insulted. The fact that you would be lecturing anyone is completely laughable.

BOTTOM LINE: This is a dog eat dog world. The size, bark, speed, and appearance of the dog don't often matter. It's the heart and fight of the dog that's going to be the determining factor. And since your reading comprehension skills are suspect, I'll help you out. I'm not advocating dogfighting.

Romo has done nothing to this point in his career to demonstrate any heart or fight. That's a stat you can take to the bank. It is my opinion that he's had plenty of time to do so. Throw in all the Manning and Favre comparisons that you want and I'll just throw back Rothliesberger and Flacco.

How you live and die by a player's stats, but ignore the most important one (wins/losses) is just beyond me.

Okay...I was willing to give you a bit more credit in the reading comprehension department but you've now proved you don't deserve it. I'm not insulted by the stats you provide, I'm insulted that you rely on stats alone to judge the effectiveness of a football player. If this were baseball, you and I would be on the same side of this argument. Football, though, is all about heart and determination. If it were all about stats, we could just all bet on the teams with the best stats every week and quit our day jobs.

I'm assuming, since you referenced KC Joyner's research earlier, that you are into fantasy football. Is that why you are so into stats as a predictor of success in football? If my assumption is correct, can we not delineate between fantasy football and what actually takes place on Sundays? Romo can be the statistical leader in every category, but if he's not accurate at crunch time or is careless with the ball, does that not concern you as a fan?

My argument is not about stats and how they might/might not correlate to potential success in football. My argument, going back to last year, has been that stats don't amount to squat unless they are accompanied by victories.

It's that plain and simple.

1) If you've agreed with me that "heart" cannot be quantified, it wouldn't exactly be logical to throw out an actual source of empirical evidence of a player or team's ability. So why not trust in what facts you have?

2) If you know from analysis that Romo is, just an example, the 10th best quarterback in the league. You then could also know that over time, a quarterback will generally produce "in the clutch" about what he normally produces. We can then logically see how sticking with a good quarterback, even if he's "failed" in some important games, can be better odds than whomever the backup guy is. We've seen this play out many, many times.

If you want a QB that is "clutch" in the playoffs, even if he's not so good during the regular season, you would want Rex Grossman. There's problably a reason no one really wants him though, despite some of his really good playoff games.

3) I don't play fantasy football. Sorry. I'm interested in KC Joyner because I'm interested in logical deduction of a fundemental truth, or the closest I can get to it. Just like Sabermetrics in baseball.

4) There's plenty of stats that don't correlate to victories, like passing yards. Completion percentage. So yes, you'd be right at these; they don't matter if they don't predict victories.

But they're are stats that do correlate to a higher percentage of victories. One is Yards Per Attempt. Another is Passer Rating/Defensive Passer Rating.

You've probably heard all your life that teams run to win, but in the NFL it's no longer true. The teams that win most are the teams that pass well and defend the pass well.

Making sense again! Plus you cannot judge "heart" by wins or losses or playoffs. It still boils down to which team scored the most points. Not whose QB did what. Not by whose linebacker has the loudest threat on the field and people say "well he took control". It all about how the team performed to get the necessary points to win that game. All these stats about how many comebacks for wins for QB's is bunk. If he was so good to begin with then why does he have to play from behind so much. Oh maybe he lacks concentration early in game. Naaaa that could mean he's unprepared or unmotivated. Ooops now some would blame the coach for not getting him ready. This list goes on and is useless but still and argument.

Now these points are more toward sonoman not you cat.

Just out of curiosity, what young inexperienced QB would you go get instead of Romo?

Romo has stunk more than he shined this season but he isn't the only problem causing the Cowboys to lose.

Never said he was

i've been saying since TO was traded...Felix jones is the key to our offense. he's hurt, dallas is stationary. barber runs hard, and choice runs smart, but neither has speed. none of our recievers have great speed except austin and he's unreliable. a healthy felix jones is the answer.

Never said you did I was just stating my opinion Romo wasn't the Cowboys only problem.

I agree with the need for Felix Jones to be healthy for the Cowboys to win.