Should've been in the '92 season but, they had to have the Mother of all playoff collapses. The virtuosos of futility. The creators of double, triple catatonic losses. Losing playoff games in the MOST excruciating way possible. The epitome of imbecility. The king of the choke job. My team, your team, America's team (well two out of three aint bad) the Houston Oilers! Seriously, it may be a definite possibility in the next few years. Yes, that would be awesome!
He fumbled a pass he caught and it was knocked into the endzone for a touchback and which lead to a TD.
I think it's too early to tell on this comparison ... Early stages have me leaning toward Schaub because of the confidence he exudes and doesn't get rattled when things are not going so good. Romo while more talented, remains to be seen not how well he does when everything is going right but rather when everything is not going right. Can he have that command presence to turnaround and overcome difficult stretches in games and the season.
I happened to have followed Romo since he became a Cowboy...I always used to joke with my brother that if Tony Romo played the way he played in his first couple of preseasons he would be our starting QB...hell he'd be MVP of the league...Romo was a preseason monster, I just wondered why they kept him on the bench for soo long....well now I understand...Romo didnt come out of nowhere you know. He's a prime example of a QB that was never rushed into a position where he would be a failure...ex.David Carr, Eli Manning, ect.. Those guys were thrown to the lions in a trial by fire...I saw how good Schaub was in Atlanta and knew he was going to be the man for the Texans...He's proved me right so far...The reason I know Romo will be great is because he's got something in him thats special... Its a combination of Quickness, Intelligence, Awareness, Elusivness, and his arm..thats not mentioning the plethora of talent that surrounds him.. it just seems anytime Romo throws the ball something good happens for the Boys... I don't see the scrambling ablity in Schaub. But I do see the poise that makes him such an effective QB..bottom line both these guys are above average football IQ, and you can tell that they both do their homework every week.. Elusivness and athleticism may be the only thing that separates these guys...other than that I dont see how any Texan or Cowboy fan would complain about their guy
It's funny, but after this week's loss, I had that same feeling I used to have the week after an Oiler loss. This is the first time I can remember having that feeling since the early 90's. I used to feel depressed every Monday (and sometimes into Tuesday) after every Oiler loss. Until this week, I haven't felt that way about the Texans. I think this is a GOOD thing. I'm finally becoming emotionally involved with this team. Of course I always love it when we win, but when we lose, it was really no big deal. Until this week.
bb I love, love, love the Boys (well maybe not that much), but you are spot on. My understanding is Jerry/Bill knew the guy was good but didn't want to risk a rebuilding year on him. Only after it was clear with Bledsoe as the starter the Boys were not a playoff team (or at best 1st round fidder) did they decide to roll the dice. They knew he was good, even Bledsoe knew he was good, they just didn't know how he would react in real games. (Remember Parcells and/or his disciple kept Brady on the bench until Bledsoe got injured, and we know the rest of that story). After nearly a full season of games, it is pretty clear Romo does deliver in real games. Couple more points. It is possible Romo is just driving the bus the way Brees was driving the bus last year. The Cowboys have great receiving targets, good backs, and the oline is playing very well this year (last year, not so much). That said I do believe Romo is more talented and has more skills than Brees (see next point), I don't think he is merely a decent bus driver. Romo actually has lots of strengths. He is a very quick reader of defenses, makes quick decisions, is slippery/elusive in the pocket, and is accurate. Sure I would rather have Brady or Manning running the Cowboys offense, but after that, it is up for grabs. Palmer would neccissitate a better pocket/holding blocks longer. Farve could be more error prone. McNabb might not be as accurate or as quick in his decision making. Now I am not saying with confidence Romo is the #3 QB in the league or better than those guys right now in general (and of course not better to what they were in their primes), but he might just be the #3rd guy that Cowboys could have right now. Sorry, havn't seen Charles Schaub enough to gauge him, but I doubt the Boys would take him over Romo.
Quite possibly the most absurd thing written here. The fumbled snap on the game winning FG attempt wasn't important? Oooooook.
It wouldn't of come to that if Terry Glenn woulnd't have fumbled the ball which lead to a saftey, making the score 20-15 Dallas. Then they scored a TD with that free kick giving the Seahawks a 21-20 lead. The fumble lead to 8 points. Do some research. It's readily availble on the iternet.
Careful, this post is bordering on the RyanED alter ego. Perhaps he has article about the game on his AOL sports blog?
I understand all that, but that still doesn't change the fact that the Cowboys had a chance to win and Romo fumbled the snap on a sure-fire FG attempt. To say that wasn't important, like you did, is completely absurd and borderline r****ded.
Romo played very well that day, particularly for a guys 1st playoff game in his 1st season playing. Yes he made a collasal error on that one play--though he was heads up enough to almost get the TD they should have gotten (see below). But like ryan17wagner, the veteran Glenn made a terrible play earlier. And the Cowboys defense failed them twice. Once allowing that 4th quarter drive post safety to happen, then not getting the ball back after having the Hawks pinned at the 2 (on 1st down Alexander rip them for 20 when everyone in the world knew he was getting the ball). Further, there is no sure thing even if Romo has a good hold and the kick is true Seattle doesn't score again. In fact I would say better than 50/50 the Seahawks get into field goal range, they had timeouts and they were carving up Dallas's D. In fact I was pretty pissed at the time Dallas didn't more aggressively go for the TD instead of the FG. So yes Romo goofed up. No he didn't cost them the game, and he certainly didn't cost them a Superbowl win (they would have had a < 1% chance last year even if they got through Seattle), and no he shouldn't and hasn't held his head down.
These two sentences I agree with. But that fumble cost the Cowboys the lead, extremely late in the game. Perhaps Seattle marches down the field, but thanks to that fumble we'll never know. And while Glenn had cost the Cowboys the lead earlier, here was the opportunity to get the lead back--and Romo fumbled it away.
