Showing posts with label Tony Romo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tony Romo. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
The Romo Years
Many people have theorized as to why we watch sports. Not just our favorite teams, but all teams, all the time. What possesses people to watch portions of every NFL game on Sunday? Or the NCAA tournament in its entirety, featuring teams and players they've never heard of. So many games, most of which we won't remember even a couple months after they happen. The popular answer to this question seems to be: to see the unexpected. It never ceases to amaze how many new things can happen in a sporting event that has been played millions of times -- take the last day of baseball season, for example. As sports fan, we want to see moments like that, moments that will probably only happen once in our lifetime. In order to see these type of moments, we sit through hours of uneventful games to make sure we don't miss anything.
But these moments don't always have to be of the spectacular ilk. It's not talked about enough, but I think a lot of people watch sports to see failure too. Not just the rival team or a particular player, but teams or players who seem to be prone to failing. This is why I think Tony Romo is good and necessary for sports. He's a polarizing player that shouldn't be polarizing. He's a hated athlete that, unless you're a Dallas Cowboys fan, shouldn't really be hated. He's judged either too fairly or too harshly and is the sole reason for a Cowboys' win or loss. He tight-ropes the line between good and bad better than any current athlete in professional American sports. It's fun to watch Tony Romo because he's going to give us those coveted spectacular moments, and also because it shuffles us one game, or even one quarter closer to one of his ultimate meltdowns.
Romo seems to be a good guy. He's never in trouble off the field, he's never ran into the stands and punched someone, and he's never insinuated that sports fans were jealous and miserable people. From what I gather, Tony Romo is hated because he's talked about often. Someone so prone to failing, I think, in the minds of many sports fans, doesn't deserve the time of day. Then there's the other side, who feel Romo is unfairly targeted for his team's failures. It's true that quarterbacks tend to receive the brunt of the blame regardless, but these people look for reasons to bash Romo. For instance, a three interception day could be interpreted as trying to make something out of nothing (an exceptional will to win), rather than fucking up and blowing his team the game. Both sides have an argument, of course.
Tony Romo played one of his quintessential games against the Lions last week. He moved the Cowboys offense down the field at will, connecting with Dez Bryant for Dallas' two touchdowns in the first half, and a third to Jason Witten three minutes into the second half. The Cowboys were up 27-3 and it looked to be a route. It looked to be a route, but those who have watched Tony Romo know better. He promptly threw a Pick-6 on the very next drive. But this Pick-6 was almost too good to be true. The defender was linebacker Bobby Carpenter, current Lion, former Cowboy, and a groomsman in Romo's wedding. Something like this could only happen to Tony Romo and serves to further the mythology surrounding his collapses. Romo throws another Pick-6 on the very next possession and you know where this is going. The Lions are back in the game, score a couple touchdowns of their own, Romo throws another pick at the end of the game and the Cowboys lose. Romo's final line: 34-47, 331 yds, 3 TD, 3 INT, 86.4 QB Rating -- all of his good work in the first half negated.
Performances like this are why Romo can navigate his way through any realm and remain compelling. He can be whatever you want him to be. Use the "Nickname Test" to further this point. Some nicknames could only work for certain players, think Dennis "The Worm" Rodman or William "Refrigerator" Perry. There is nothing distinct about Tony Romo. He's exceptionally good and bad. Here are six random things I just thought of:
Officer Krupke
Hydrogenated Fish Oil
Love Potion No. 9
Stay Gold, Ponyboy
The River Kwai
Anschluss
All six of these could conceivably be nicknames for Tony Romo. Think of six nicknames of your own and they will work just as well. Isn't this what Romo is all about? He cannot be packaged and sold to the masses in the form of a cute, all-encompassing moniker. Pepsi Max used Romo as their spokesperson and failed because they tried to capitalize on his tendency to make mistakes. The commercial was meant to be absurd and came off as plausible:
In an age where labels are slapped on players seemingly from Day One, Romo defies all categorization. This is what makes him such a compelling sports figure. Dissecting Tom Brady's dominance eventually becomes boring, as does cracking on the futility of the 1990s Clipper teams. Romo keeps us on our toes, with him, there will always be something to talk about and something to see. Fittingly, none of us know what he is yet -- we just know his teams are going to lose when it matters.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
The Cowboys Aren't Who We Thought They Were
Cowboys head coach Wade Phillips was fired yesterday. Finally. His termination was like the last couple weeks of a woman's pregnancy. You know it's coming, and soon, you just don't know when. (By the way, sorry for using termination and pregnancy in the same sentence).
Phillips' firing comes as a surprise to only those who believed Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, who said two days before that Phillips was safe for at least the remainder of the season. Owners like Jones speak of accountability, which apparently doesn't apply to a person's word only two days before.
I'm not here to defend Phillips or question his firing. When a team, regardless of their stature, is in disarray, something needs to be done. The head coach is the captain that goes down with the ship. All is right with the post-1995 world, the Cowboys are no good.
Unfortunately for him, Phillips is the fall guy for an undisciplined and underachieving team that is composed of talented individuals, but has no idea how to coexist as a team.
This year's Cowboys remind me of England's 2010 World Cup campaign. England was supremely talented in every position, boasting most of the EPL's best players. Individually they were great, as a team, they were terrible.
After England's 0-0 draw with Algeria, former American national and current ESPN analyst Alexi Lalas proclaimed what everyone was thinking. When asked what was wrong with England, he replied, "How about this: they're just not very good."
The weight had been lifted off of his shoulders and the smoke screen disappeared. Lalas and the rest of the non-English analysts could finally express their opinions frankly about the overrated English team. Phillips' firing is the icing on the cake for the removal of the "Cowboys are really good" veil.
Many fans including myself felt that maybe the Cowboys just had trouble closing out games. With Romo as the starter, they lost all five of their games by seven points or less. I also desperately wanted to believe that beating the Cowboys in Dallas was a big win. The Cowboys are and have been officially Bills status. That win means nothing now.
If Jerry Jones wants to talk about accountability he has to first look at the players on the field. Romo, not exactly thought of as a clutch player, couldn't lead his team to victory in the aforementioned close games.
Number one wide receiver Miles Austin has been wildly inconsistent. In his four good games: 36 catches for 571 yards and two touchdowns. In his four bad games, 9 catches for 86 yards and no touchdowns. Austin either shows up big or doesn't show up at all.
The running game and offensive line have been nonexistent. The Jones-Barber-Choice "three-headed monster" has combined for 543 yards and two touchdowns. DeMarcus Ware is supposed to be the leader on defense and appears to have a difficult time keeping his focus for an entire game. The Cowboys' secondary can't keep their hands off the opposing receivers.
Wade Phillips has been on a roller coaster ride for the past three and half years. From the highs of a 13-3 regular season his first year and the Cowboys' first playoff win since 1996 two year later, to the lows of a 1-2 playoff record and 45-7 trumping in Green Bay, Phillips can finally get off the ride. He'll walk through the Exit Gate with a 35-24 overall record as Cowboys head coach.
It's no wonder Phillips always had a confused, "What am I looking at?" face. He never had any idea which team was going to show up on the field. Unfortunately for him, this year it was always the bad one.
As the anti-Denny Green might say, "The Cowboys aren't who we thought they were."
Phillips' firing comes as a surprise to only those who believed Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, who said two days before that Phillips was safe for at least the remainder of the season. Owners like Jones speak of accountability, which apparently doesn't apply to a person's word only two days before.
I'm not here to defend Phillips or question his firing. When a team, regardless of their stature, is in disarray, something needs to be done. The head coach is the captain that goes down with the ship. All is right with the post-1995 world, the Cowboys are no good.
Unfortunately for him, Phillips is the fall guy for an undisciplined and underachieving team that is composed of talented individuals, but has no idea how to coexist as a team.
This year's Cowboys remind me of England's 2010 World Cup campaign. England was supremely talented in every position, boasting most of the EPL's best players. Individually they were great, as a team, they were terrible.
After England's 0-0 draw with Algeria, former American national and current ESPN analyst Alexi Lalas proclaimed what everyone was thinking. When asked what was wrong with England, he replied, "How about this: they're just not very good."
The weight had been lifted off of his shoulders and the smoke screen disappeared. Lalas and the rest of the non-English analysts could finally express their opinions frankly about the overrated English team. Phillips' firing is the icing on the cake for the removal of the "Cowboys are really good" veil.
Many fans including myself felt that maybe the Cowboys just had trouble closing out games. With Romo as the starter, they lost all five of their games by seven points or less. I also desperately wanted to believe that beating the Cowboys in Dallas was a big win. The Cowboys are and have been officially Bills status. That win means nothing now.
If Jerry Jones wants to talk about accountability he has to first look at the players on the field. Romo, not exactly thought of as a clutch player, couldn't lead his team to victory in the aforementioned close games.
Number one wide receiver Miles Austin has been wildly inconsistent. In his four good games: 36 catches for 571 yards and two touchdowns. In his four bad games, 9 catches for 86 yards and no touchdowns. Austin either shows up big or doesn't show up at all.
The running game and offensive line have been nonexistent. The Jones-Barber-Choice "three-headed monster" has combined for 543 yards and two touchdowns. DeMarcus Ware is supposed to be the leader on defense and appears to have a difficult time keeping his focus for an entire game. The Cowboys' secondary can't keep their hands off the opposing receivers.
Wade Phillips has been on a roller coaster ride for the past three and half years. From the highs of a 13-3 regular season his first year and the Cowboys' first playoff win since 1996 two year later, to the lows of a 1-2 playoff record and 45-7 trumping in Green Bay, Phillips can finally get off the ride. He'll walk through the Exit Gate with a 35-24 overall record as Cowboys head coach.
It's no wonder Phillips always had a confused, "What am I looking at?" face. He never had any idea which team was going to show up on the field. Unfortunately for him, this year it was always the bad one.
As the anti-Denny Green might say, "The Cowboys aren't who we thought they were."
Friday, October 15, 2010
What's In A (Fantasy Basketball) Name?
Do you play fantasy sports? Of course you do, I shouldn't have bothered asking. About a quarter of all adult males who are young enough to know how to use a computer do. The next time you're in a bar watching football, try to decipher some of the conversation going on around you. At some point, that conversation will turn to fantasy numbers. It doesn't matter if "RB X" rushed for 17 yards in the first three quarters. If "RB X" rips a 40 yard TD run in the 4th, he had a good day. Some people can't even tell you what the score of the game was, but they know how many fantasy points each player put up.
Drafting and following your team is a lot of fun, but picking a team name can almost be just as thrilling. I've seen enough "Southside Hitmen," "Ball Busters," and "Rim Job"-type names to know a little creativity in a name goes a long way.
While not funny, I've settled for quirky yet common terms used in the particular sport to choose my team names. A couple of recent ones, "5-4-3 Double Play" for baseball, and "Two and a Half Steps" for basketball. Those names aren't funny but at least you can tell I tried.
One rule I've always adhered to when picking a team name is the "Don't name your team after a player rule." The reason being I would feel not only obligated to draft that player, but reach in the draft for him so that he's not taken under my nose.
I've made two exceptions to this rule. Last year's fantasy football name was "Vick's Pitbulls," and this year's is "Tebow's Tears." Both were OK because neither player was expected to contribute much.
Last year, Vick played sparingly, and this year, it doesn't look like Tebow will play at all. It's easy not to handcuff yourself to players who aren't playing.
I broke the rule again.
I didn't mean to, but a name so fantastic popped into my head that I just had to. "Rose Before Hoes" combines my favorite player and plays on one of my least favorite phrases. That's a winning combination.
While searching for a team avatar, I found that Rose did a GQ photshoot for the January 2010 issue. Maybe Rose isn't the model type, maybe they dressed him up in ways that basketball players shouldn't be dressed up, but this picture he took for the magazine was perfect for a homosexuality-influenced team name like "Rose Before Hoes."
So the question is: Do I reach for D. Rose?
Depends on the rest of the managers in my league. In my baseball league last year, their was a team named "Longoria Time No See." He had either the fifth or sixth overall pick and took Longoria. Before he did, the other managers encouraged him to, and maybe even left Longoria on the board so that guy could take his team's namesake.
On the other hand, you have managers like myself, who take the whole fantasy sports thing a little too seriously. In this year's football draft there was a team named "Romo 4 MVP." Stupid name. Probably the reason I didn't respect him. Anyway, it's my pick in the 3rd round, I need a quarterback, Romo is the best one available. Am I going to sit around and wait for "Romo 4 MVP" to draft him? Of course not.
It all depends on whether managers are drafting to win or drafting their favorite players, or allowing others to.
There's plenty of great point guards, eight of which put up better fantasy numbers than Rose last year. Rose's ranking is lowered because he doesn't put up the assists typical of a point guard. I'm hoping Boozer, Korver, and an overall improved offensive game plan will change that.
I long for the day if/when I make enough money to join a large stakes fantasy sports money league. Maybe then I'll have an excuse to care this much.
Drafting and following your team is a lot of fun, but picking a team name can almost be just as thrilling. I've seen enough "Southside Hitmen," "Ball Busters," and "Rim Job"-type names to know a little creativity in a name goes a long way.
While not funny, I've settled for quirky yet common terms used in the particular sport to choose my team names. A couple of recent ones, "5-4-3 Double Play" for baseball, and "Two and a Half Steps" for basketball. Those names aren't funny but at least you can tell I tried.
One rule I've always adhered to when picking a team name is the "Don't name your team after a player rule." The reason being I would feel not only obligated to draft that player, but reach in the draft for him so that he's not taken under my nose.
I've made two exceptions to this rule. Last year's fantasy football name was "Vick's Pitbulls," and this year's is "Tebow's Tears." Both were OK because neither player was expected to contribute much.
Last year, Vick played sparingly, and this year, it doesn't look like Tebow will play at all. It's easy not to handcuff yourself to players who aren't playing.
I broke the rule again.
I didn't mean to, but a name so fantastic popped into my head that I just had to. "Rose Before Hoes" combines my favorite player and plays on one of my least favorite phrases. That's a winning combination.
While searching for a team avatar, I found that Rose did a GQ photshoot for the January 2010 issue. Maybe Rose isn't the model type, maybe they dressed him up in ways that basketball players shouldn't be dressed up, but this picture he took for the magazine was perfect for a homosexuality-influenced team name like "Rose Before Hoes."
So the question is: Do I reach for D. Rose?
Depends on the rest of the managers in my league. In my baseball league last year, their was a team named "Longoria Time No See." He had either the fifth or sixth overall pick and took Longoria. Before he did, the other managers encouraged him to, and maybe even left Longoria on the board so that guy could take his team's namesake.
On the other hand, you have managers like myself, who take the whole fantasy sports thing a little too seriously. In this year's football draft there was a team named "Romo 4 MVP." Stupid name. Probably the reason I didn't respect him. Anyway, it's my pick in the 3rd round, I need a quarterback, Romo is the best one available. Am I going to sit around and wait for "Romo 4 MVP" to draft him? Of course not.
It all depends on whether managers are drafting to win or drafting their favorite players, or allowing others to.
There's plenty of great point guards, eight of which put up better fantasy numbers than Rose last year. Rose's ranking is lowered because he doesn't put up the assists typical of a point guard. I'm hoping Boozer, Korver, and an overall improved offensive game plan will change that.
I long for the day if/when I make enough money to join a large stakes fantasy sports money league. Maybe then I'll have an excuse to care this much.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


