Dismiss Notice
Guest, I have a big favor to ask you. We've been working very hard to establish ourselves on social media. If you like/follow our pages it would be a HUGE help to us. SoSH on Facebook and Inside the Pylon Thanks! Nip

Romo and Juliet: the Art of Pre-called Plays

Discussion in 'Blinded by the Lombardis: Patriots Forum' started by Brand Name, Jan 31, 2019.

  1. Brand Name

    Brand Name thinks there's no 'i' in denial Staff Member Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,351
    I've had the same question, given I think this is personally a repeatable skill for even someone like me who watches a ton of film, but never played a down at any level. Yes, that's a humblebrag.

    Before any snap, this is my thought process: Look at the down lineman and their technique, count the secondary, check for (big) nickel et al, see if a possible man in motion uncovers man by his assignments follow or reveals zone by his lack thereof. Now you have something. Anyone in odd positioning? Who's in the package with the personnel (i.e. trips, 11, etc.). Anyone being set up as a decoy, like a split wide Develin for Edelman in the Jordan package? Hell, is the route to set something up? Show the go, make them respect that and bite on the slant eventually?

    I also like to think of: What's the tendency of the defense? The coach and/or coordinator by aggressiveness? Like, Gus Bradley as part of the Carroll coaching tree in the divisional round is/was going to obviously call Cover 3 because of his tendencies/history, but also out of his necessity of player personnel and injuries with DBs at LB. Given how late we are in the playoffs, everyone knows everyone's tendencies. I'm inclined to believe plays will be well designed to beat these defensive tendencies. Taking that nickel C3 example just a bit further, my eyes are looking for at least one, if not both of, a dig or a seam to be part of the play. Can't you JUST see Romo calling that, resulting in many accolades? "OOOOH, JIM, look out for Gronk going straight up the field here! Here we go!" This is nice but ultimately just game flow. Doesn't take an excellent QB on Romo's level to know that play will succeed.

    Sometimes it's not going to be that simple and you need to connect a few dots to solve a defense like a math problem with inserted variables, solving for X. Let's say I see the following: NT facing weakside from the C? A DT on the RG? A DE on the TE? WILL on an OT? That's Miami 4-3, base, the predecessors to the Tampa 2 and today's modern use of Cover 2 man. It helps to learn items like this as essentially vocabulary words and almost like rules of grammar, for those wanting to learn more.

    Given as much, what I find most enjoyable about Romo's analysis itself, other than his genuine, childlike enthusiasm for good football? The times not when a play is predicted, but rather when he talks about the QB and his center communicating proper plays, the kill counts, silent motions, and how they do this, depending on the venue and crowd noise. It's what makes each game, and QB, unique. It's a bad memory to be sure, but remember Troy Brown running the wrong route in Indy in the 2006 AFCCG very late in the 4th? That might've sealed that particular Lamar Hunt trophy if caught.

    Regarding the precalls though, this feels like it'd be common across anyone with a deep background studying and/or especially playing the game. When people started talking about Romo being a better and/or replacement DC than Bob Sutton after the Chiefs game in KC, I knew we had a problem with how most of society understands football. I mean, Romo gets to see the formation pre-snap. Sutton did not, and had to call the play beforehand, to consider nothing of optimal viewing angle Romo is afforded from the CBS booth.

    Furthermore, what I was tracking with precalls is just how many went to New England. Pretty much all of them, as contrasted with materially less with KC's more modern offense. BB's Perkins-Erhardt, with some of its vintage dialed up plays with guard pulls on runs, existed heavily during Romo's career, to say nothing of the Parcells-BB connection with some of the playbook.

    I brought up an analogy to ordering a sandwich from a chain restaurant on a podcast I did earlier this week discussing reading offenses, and it bears repeating here. Let's take your favorite from this restaurant, their godly PB&J since there are so many ways we can build that this sandwich can be ordered, but it follows a simple enough plan.

    You can have white bread, wheat bread, pumpernickel bread, rye bread from this restaurant. Peanut butter, you've also got chunky, smooth, maybe the restaurant is friendly to those who have allergies and offers sunflower seed butter. But we've also got to decide on which side of the sandwich you want the peanut butter on. Let's say we go a little bit sticky on the top of the mouth, we'll load to the weakside, a very Patriots thing to do, especially on short passing downs (2nd to Indy in frequency, according to SIS). Now we'll add jelly. But that can be marmalade, preserves, currant, or just jelly. That's without considering the flavors, like orange, strawberry, grape, blackberry. Do we want it seedy or just a smooth ride inside? For as much as the jokes exist about Andy Reid ordering off of menus from playsheets, I truly believe it's not the worst comparison, if much more complex on numerous levels, in both how you order, and also the depth of the playbooks.

    So what's the point of all that? Well, not only are you familiar with that sandwich but because it's your favorite, you know what PB blends with each bread, each jelly option. You know how each will look, smell, and taste. Maybe you've tried making a sandwich in some way? You know how this plays out, from firsthand experience on many different levels, especially with the benefit of having the product right in front of you. Football is much the same way. It evokes the senses of memory and familiarity to a QB, on either side of the ball, especially given how much playcalling hasn't changed much since the late 80s (don't see the 5-2 much anymore, heh, to name one notable change). Given all this, especially given a player of Romo's caliber, why shouldn't this familiarity to anybody be seen as anything but expected?

    The hardest part about football is always going to be predicting how the play itself goes, given any of 22 individuals could do something miraculous or do something absolutely out of position. It's a game of chaos, bedlam, all starting in the trenches. After all, how often do you see, following a pass play, that the OL is still in a straight line after their blocking?

    So yeah... I think more people could do this, but they choose not to because, if I understand matters correctly, the networks do not like this being said, although I'm not sure I fully understand those particular logistics.

    But I guess I ask, and why I made this thread, do you view pre-calling plays as impressive? What does it say about football? Is it something you tend to do as well? Anyone else got an approach like this, for better or worse? This isn't meant to be inherently Romo specific, albeit inspired by him, but it's a psychological phenomenon that hits everyone from the casual to the die-hard, so I'm curious to see how others think here, in many respects.
     
  2. Preacher

    Preacher Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,525
    Of course you put the peanut butter on both sides so the jelly doesn't soak through.

     
  3. rsmith7

    rsmith7 lurker

    Messages:
    21
    Ha, yes, but the 3-4 v. run is in essence 5-2. See the pic from the first Chiefs game. Traditional 5-2 knockdown, SS rolled up. This D is notoriously vulnerable to the off tackle play. Guess where they ran? And McDaniel forced this look with the I formation. If they were calling this at the line and I'm sure they were the only read is which side is the knockdown.

    Creating football game plans/calling can appear like facing a menu. What I think McDaniels/Belichick/Brady do brilliantly is to isolate the decision(s) to one area. Look at the playoff Chiefs BBreakdown and you'll see on those plays where JE came in motion to create the stack; the play came down to how the S/C combo played it (or didn't). Sure there's a check down somewhere but the play is just how those four, WR/Z, S/C interact.

    That is how almost everyone develops passing plays (read the triangle!), but not everyone, in particular many QBs, gets it so well as a group as McD/B/B, even at the pro level. Romo was an outstanding quarterback who got it; intuitively he puts the whole menu aside and locks in on one item and its "sides". He sees the concepts/schemes developing and instinctively knows where the concept is going and the possibilities. Not what everyone can do in the moment or even after spending a lifetime watching film.
    [​IMG]
     
  4. Saints Rest

    Saints Rest Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,866
    I wonder if part of what separates Romo from his peers, is his willingness to verbalize his thoughts so quickly and forcefully. Perhaps the traditional color guy sees the same thing, but opts to say nothing, either out of fear of being wrong or from some perception that he SHOULD stay quiet.
     
  5. lexrageorge

    lexrageorge Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,955
    Traditionally, the job of the color analyst has been to explain the play after it happens. A good analyst would see the play develop and then use that info in helping to explain the play after the fact. I'm guessing for most analysts it would be a new skill to try to explain the play both pre- and post-snap, so they save their energy and focus to the post-snap analysis.

    There is also the peer pressure factor. Periodically, you would hear analysts say things like "This is prime territory for Brady to do the QB sneak", or "I think they should go deep here". And the play would be something completely different, and random bloggers would make it a point of calling out the analyst for being so wrong. After all, it's fun to second guess the talking head; recall John Madden and "I think they should play for overtime here".

    Romo seems confident enough in his abilities to simply not care what random bloggers think about his pre-snap calls. He'll make mistakes, but then laugh about it and move on. It's novel and I don't believe it's as easy to do it in a broadcast booth for every play as it is watching in a living room and calling maybe one out of every 5 or 10 pre-snap plays here and there.
     
  6. Saints Rest

    Saints Rest Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,866
    Agreed. I wonder if the traditional separation of powers has been that pre-snap and during the play, it’s the PBP guy’s time to rule the airwaves; then post-play, its the color guy’s time to talk.
    Now Romo is throwing that on its head by prognosticating pre-snap.
    Will Aikman and Collinsworth and Fouts, etc start to follow suit in the fall?
     
  7. dcmissle

    dcmissle Deflatigator Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    26,225
    The networks are forever ISO something new and compelling in the broadcasting. Sweet Jesus, some fools thought it would be a good idea to stick Dennis Miller and Tony Kornheiser in the booth.

    If what Romo does were pedestrian, it certainly would have been done before. I’ll chalk it up to a good and quick mind, familiarity with the League, passion for football and lots of hard work.

    There is a lot of jealousy of Romo at the moment. Some people hate because they wish they could do it. Others hate because they don’t like his personality. There are contrarians who hate anything that many people like. And there are professional haters who seemingly despise ever announcer who ever climbed into a booth. Screw them all.
     
  8. wiffleballhero

    wiffleballhero Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,278
    Romo has also been both exact and right in a handful of situations where maybe the norm is to say something like, 'expect a run to the left side here.'

    In contrast, Romo is calling which blocker is going to make the hole. I'll give him that. He also has not, in the games I've watched, had stacks of obviously bad guesses against a few seemingly prescient calls, so that helps with this impression of him being a sage.

    I like Romo, I just don't like the fact that it seems like he is giving away the whole strategy during the game.
     
  9. joe dokes

    joe dokes Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,046
    I just hope he doesn't overdo it. Even if he's right every single time, it's also that much more talking. If I was sitting next to you at the game, and accurately called out every play before it happened, I think you'd get sick of me. (And if not that, you'd find another reason; but that's neither here nor there).
     
  10. Adrian's Dome

    Adrian's Dome Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    4,282
    Personally I find it refreshing, it makes me feel as if the person calling the game knows more about it than I do (obviously the case for any ex-player, but Romo actually articulates it.)

    Some may enjoy cookie cutter analysis where the booth guys just state the obvious and recap what happened, but I prefer Romo's style.
     
  11. lexrageorge

    lexrageorge Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,955
    I don't understand the bolded at all. Romo is the color analyst; his job is to give fans insight into the game strategy. It's much more interesting than his predecessor talking about "how the defense needs a stop here to give the offense a chance to score".
     
  12. SMU_Sox

    SMU_Sox loves his fluffykins SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,070
    Romo has the advantage of being in the booth, being able to have an all-22 view, and knows how to identify coverage quickly. I still have to reference Inside the Pylon to remember, for example, the difference between cover 4 and cover 6 and need help figuring out which coverages are which. He also knows virtually every 2 man route concept and what the Patriots like to run. Yesterday I downloaded a PPT from Mascho which is 25 pages each with 3-5 two-man route concepts - so that's between 75 to 125 two-man route concepts. Romo must understand what the Patriots tendencies are based on film, down, personnel, where receivers are lining up, what the defense is showing, etc. That's a lot to know. Now when that's your job for 20+ years and you were good at it you tend to know it cold like Romo. Sage Rosenfels talked about it on a pod. He says that for a lot of former QBs like him that they can Romo too for many of the reasons above and also having a perfect view.

    Never having played it the more I learn about the game the more I respect the people who understand it to the finest details and process and analyze things well. To do it quickly is more impressive even considering the advantages a guy like Romo has.
     
  13. wiffleballhero

    wiffleballhero Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,278
    I was being mildly facetious. When Romo called the Gronk catch -- or Edelman's catch over the middle -- it felt like he was giving away too much information if you could imagine the Chiefs listening in. I want to know the strategy, I just don't want the Rams to know it.



    WSJ says 68%.
     
  14. johnmd20

    johnmd20 literally like ebola Lifetime Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    36,664
    This is cuckoo. I mean, tin foil hat insanity.

    These games are shown on a little bit of a delay. By the time the Chiefs heard what Romo said, the play was basically over. Further, there is literally no way to communicate that to a defensive guy right before the snap and have it make an impact. And what if he's wrong?

    I liked dcmissle's post above. People love to hate so they can hate. It's a weird thing about this day and age, where hatred is worn like a badge of honor. This goes for Max Kellerman or internet tough guys or Skip Bayless, or all the other hot take assholes that are out there.

    But Romo is awesome and screw the haters for not appreciating his talent, work ethic, skill, and enthusiasm.
     
  15. EvilEmpire

    EvilEmpire Dope Staff Member Dope

    Messages:
    8,862
    This is exactly right.

    I enjoy listening to people who are extremely knowledgeable. I appreciate those who are passionate. Romo is both. The passion may even be the best part; his enthusiasm is infectious.
     
  16. Dollar

    Dollar Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,115
    I'll give Romo credit for making some accurate predictions in the biggest game of the year that he has done so far, but there have been too many times this season where he guessed what the play would be and was completely wrong. I started to get sick of watching his games because there would be so many bad predictions. So I can't get as excited as most of you are about his work at the end of the AFCCG, because it's really just small sample size on the biggest of stages.
     
  17. NortheasternPJ

    NortheasternPJ Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,593
    Fully agree. He did a great job at the end of the game which got people excited. If you listen to the Patriots radio broadcast Zolak and Socci "call plays" all the time if you listen and they don't throw it in your face. Instead of going
    "Ohh yeah JIM LOOK ITS GOING TO GRONK!"

    Socci or Zolak will say "Gronk motions out and is one on one at the top with no safety help" or "White motions out and there's a mismatch against a LB" They're telling you what you need to know and good info on a mismatch, where the Patriots are known to go to. I much prefer that style to Romo's. If you are watching a game by your home team you can typically figure out 75% of the time what the plan is.

    If the Pats have Michel in the backfield and Edelman motions and slows at the end of it by the tackle and you yell LOOKS LIKE A RUN HERE JIM, you're going to be right like 80% of the time.
     
  18. wiffleballhero

    wiffleballhero Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,278
    I must be doing the internety thing wrong, or something (a tone error? inappropriate use of hyperbole?).

    For the record: I don't really think that Romo's comments are actually being listened to by defensive coordinators in the other booth, ready to pass the information down to Andy Reid, or whatever. Geesh!
     
  19. staz

    staz Intangible Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    11,901
    Look, Mike, there's no mystery here. All I'm tryin' to tell ya is the peanut butter is blocking both ends - just let it do it's job...
     
  20. Dan Murfman

    Dan Murfman Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,384
    He's called 2599 plays this season and made predictions on 72 of them. And he was right 68%.

    https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/01/tony-romo-nfl-prediction-accuracy-super-bowl
     
  21. joe dokes

    joe dokes Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,046
    I wonder if it's easier to get Brady right because Brady makes the right play more often. IOW, he was "wrong" on a Blake Bortles call because Bortles failed to throw it to the guy that was wide open, as Romo thought he would be.

    For shits n' giggles and context I'd love to see that 68% figure compared to what defensive coordinators estimate as their own successful "prediction" rate.
     
  22. maufman

    maufman Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers Staff Member Dope Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    23,879
    His predictions have been insightful more than 68% of the time, though. For example, if Romo says the play is going off-tackle to the left, and it’s a play-action pass that initially sets up like a run to the left, Romo has still provided insight. In fact, I’d say he has provided more insight in that instance than in one where he merelg told me what was going to happen four seconds before I saw it with my own eyes.
     
  23. drbretto

    drbretto guidence counselor SoSH Member

    Messages:
    8,916
    If it makes you feel better, I got ya! But, Poe's law and all.
     
  24. singaporesoxfan

    singaporesoxfan Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    7,795
    I listen occasionally to the Patriots broadcast on Sirius and I like the broadcast, but here's the difference between what you've described and Romo's style - Romo takes the observation one step further and tells you what is going to happen. So it's not just "Gronk motions out and is one on one at the top with no safety help", it's "Gronk motions out and is one on one at the top with no safety help which means you should look for Brady to be throwing to Gronk". I suppose connecting those dots might come across as super obvious to more hardcore football fans, but for a more casual fan that is really helpful.

    In general, to respond to the OP's question, it's not that pre-calling per se is impressive, it's the ability to communicate complex knowledge and make it comprehensible to a wide audience and do so with passion/enthusiasm, and Romo is one of the first color commentators who I've seen be able to do that.
     
  25. TFisNEXT

    TFisNEXT Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,755

    This is my biggest takeaway. Romo isn't treating the audience as ignorant by spouting useless cliches, but at the same time, he's delivering the Xs and Os in an easy enough format so the typical fan's eyes won't glaze over.

    Networks in general seem to be really worried about alienating non-hardcore fans with too much technical jargon. Romo seems to have a good balance and hopefully CBS doesn't think it is too wonky and try to turn him into another generic color guy. It's been refreshing.
     
  26. Bergs

    Bergs Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,055
  27. MuppetAsteriskTalk

    MuppetAsteriskTalk lurker

    Messages:
    2,279
  28. tims4wins

    tims4wins PN23's replacement SoSH Member

    Messages:
    19,954
  29. Bergs

    Bergs Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,055
    I'll make sure to contact the fact-checkers at the Onion to remedy this atrocity.
     
  30. Bosoxen

    Bosoxen Bounced back Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    9,780
  31. Papelbon's Poutine

    Papelbon's Poutine Homeland Security SoSH Member

    Messages:
    17,221
    Like button.He's awesome and refreshing.
     
  32. patinorange

    patinorange Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    15,637
    Did someone muzzle Tony on his predictions today? He seemed a little restrained. Or maybe he didn't see what he was seeing in the KC game?
     
  33. Brand Name

    Brand Name thinks there's no 'i' in denial Staff Member Dope Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    2,351
    Had to be the former. The networks don't like this, which is a shame. Golden missed opportunity, and my usual enjoyment of Romo's energy seemed absent, in that specific respect.

    I'm one individual, but I recognized bunch of formations presnap from the KC game and elsewhere, for some at-home Romoments that gave a good chunk of folks watching that slow, side eye 'what!?' look. This led to talking about how you do so, and the game flow of what was trying to be set up.

    My explanation with casual fans, of one such play, using my fingers as a telestrator: Basically when Develin is split wide on the sidelines (running a skinny post, typically), with Edelman, who running a go, to his right if weak, to his left if strong is often a basic call to Edelman for the intital read. It then often sets up Gronk on slants from intial spots as Develin on the LOS because Ds often cheat on the sidelines trying to cut the 'same' play. Nope, nice try. Happened again tonight.
     
  34. luckiestman

    luckiestman Son of the Harpy SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,441
    Don’t know if he was muzzled but the decision was made well ahead of time. On Simmons podcast, Sal told everyone to take the under on the prediction calls prop bet (and that this was an informed position not a guess).
     
  35. SMU_Sox

    SMU_Sox loves his fluffykins SoSH Member

    Messages:
    6,070
    If the Rams were disguising their coverage to Brady isn’t it possible Romo wouldn’t be able to read things in real time either?
    Edit: Basically Romo sees almost right away the Rams are going to be doing a lot of disguising coverages (think first pass). He keeps seeing it. It’s hard to predict what Brady is going to want to do because he won’t know what the defense is set up to give him.
     
  36. luckiestman

    luckiestman Son of the Harpy SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,441

    That’s possible but Romo said something early in the broadcast like “I’m not doing that tonight” and the first thing I thought of was Sal telling BS he had info that Romo was not going to be doing all the prediction stuff).
     
  37. Zedia

    Zedia Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,341
    The “they should decline this and stop the clock” bit was interesting but I couldn’t really follow what was going on. And, yeah, maybe they should’ve tried to push them out of FG range.
     
  38. DennyDoyle'sBoil

    DennyDoyle'sBoil Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill SoSH Member

    Messages:
    25,152
    I thought it was a close call but I think McVay made the better choice out of two bad options. If he takes the penalty the Patriots can get it down to about 35 seconds before punting.

    What was amazing about Romo there was that he immediately knew the rule and appreciated its significance and had the context in 2 seconds. Clock stopping on a declined penalty is going to decide a big game eventually and the implications around the two minute warning are subtle. Even Belichick seemed momentarily confused. Romo wasn’t.
     
  39. Zedia

    Zedia Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    3,341
    Yeah, but the wrinkle was that there were TWO penalties called, and they accepted one of them (per the refs announcement). But then I guess they let McVay change his mind, because it ended up being 2nd and 6? This game is so confusing sometimes,
     
  40. shawnrbu

    shawnrbu Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    22,613
    It cost Romo and The Boys a game in 2013 against the Lions.

    http://www.espn.com/nfl/recap?gameId=331027008

     
  41. NortheasternPJ

    NortheasternPJ Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    12,593
    BB flipped out on that too. If they decline both penalties is the clock supposed to run?
     
  42. DennyDoyle'sBoil

    DennyDoyle'sBoil Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill SoSH Member

    Messages:
    25,152
    Interesting. That’s how he knew it.

    No, I don’t think so.
     
  43. CantKeepmedown

    CantKeepmedown Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,643
    It did appear that McVay changed his mind on accepting the penalty and I wouldn't be surprised if someone listening to Romo got into his ear to tell him. Belichick seemed pretty pissed that it was taking so long and they were letting McVay change his mind.
     
  44. Pablo's TB Lover

    Pablo's TB Lover lurker

    Messages:
    302
    Yes I think Belichick was pissed at the ability of McVay to change his mind however and maybe the nearby ref was telling him this, the official may not have even consulted with the Rams and assumed they wanted to accept one of the penalties when going ahead and making the announcement. Communication issues aside although I was angry with individual calls, in looking at the overall officiating of the game I was pleasantly surprised. A few ticky tack calls either way but other than that the players were allowed to play.
     
  45. uncannymanny

    uncannymanny Well-Known Member Gold Supporter SoSH Member

    Messages:
    5,643
    Is that cinnamon raisin bread? What a monster.
     
  46. wiffleballhero

    wiffleballhero Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,278
    I thought Belichick was pissed about the spot because they had moved the ball and lost track of where the Pats actually got to.
     
  47. DennyDoyle'sBoil

    DennyDoyle'sBoil Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill SoSH Member

    Messages:
    25,152
    Reading lips it seemed the problem was the sideline official told him first and 20 and then when they declined the penalty he was angry that they wound the play clock without giving him time to decide what to do. He first yelled, “what’s going on” and then “you told me the wrong thing twice.”

    I think he was initially confused but then was just basically essentially lobbying to get a reset of the 25 to have some extra time to decide what to do on second down.
     
  48. DennyDoyle'sBoil

    DennyDoyle'sBoil Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill SoSH Member

    Messages:
    25,152
    Yeah, we don’t even know if he did change his mind. I think when there are two penalties like that the ref always automatically announces one is declined and then the one with more severe consequences is accepted, here the ten yarder. I doubt Parry even asked before making the announcement.

    I’ve seen Bill take like a minute to get explanations about what the consequence would be declining a penalty. I don’t think they did anything wrong there. Coaches seem to get latitude to change their mind as they think through whether to take a penalty or not. It’s not a no take backsies situation.

    I think Bill was mostly play acting to try to get a little extra time to do the math on how the free time out changed the clock management for the offense.
     
  49. TFisNEXT

    TFisNEXT Well-Known Member Lifetime Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    10,755
    It's too bad if there really was something from above that limited his ability to do that. I find it very interesting. The last thing CBS needs to do is to try and turn Romo into just another generic color commentator.

    That said, perhaps the disguised coverages played into it as well because Romo was repeatedly pointing out how the Rams were waiting until the last second to reveal whether they were in zone or man to man which was specifically giving Brady little or no time to make any pre-snap reads. We would assume logically/correctly that it prevents Romo from reading the coverage until the play is live.
     
  50. RIFan

    RIFan Member SoSH Member

    Messages:
    1,652
    I don't want to take anything away from Romo calling out the plays in the AFC Championship game, but the announcing team sits with the coaching staff and gets a preview of the game plan and how they expect to attack and defend. ie "If we see 'X' we think we'll have success running 'Z'" The Pats offensive game plan worked from the start and they deviated very little in the AFC Championship game. The pre-game interviews allowed him to feel confident in what the play calls would be. Phillips and the Rams had a lot of success defending the 22 formations which appeared to be the primary plan. Game plan got adjusted in ways that might not have come up in the pre-game interviews. That combined with the Rams disguising their defenses better than the Chiefs would have made Romo more hesitant to call out the plays.

    If anything, I appreciate Romo more after the Super Bowl for showing restraint and not trying to live up to his new found reputation.
     

Share This Page