NFL: Tony Romo, Dallas Cowboys should part ways after latest loss

[Ender]

Originally Posted by cml750

Well it seems Brandt has finally crossed the line of senility. To tell you the truth, it would serve some of you guys right to lose Romo. You guys have such short memories. Good QB's do not grow on trees. Romo is a good QB. When you have an offensive coordinator like garrett who has zero situational awareness and is totally and completely incapable of making adjustments, then ANY QB can have bad games. To tell the truth, due to Garrett's lack of adjustment to all the blitzers coming free to Romo, it is truly amazing he didn't throw more interceptions. We did our best this year when Romo took control of the offense in the hurry up. When Garrett ran the offense we sucked.

I'm not the most knowledgable fan. But it's hard for me to blame Garrett for Romos descion making. Im sure the QB has a lot to do with making adjustments and seeing blitzes. That's on Romo. It's hard for me not to believe a good QB would have killed the skins while they were sending all put blitzes. I'm sorry, as bad as Garrett is sometimes, you can't pin Romos short comings on him.

[SultanOfSix]

Originally Posted by Cajuncowboy

WTH does "Didn't you bye too?" mean?

I didn't offer up to leave. You did. You said you would leave if he doesn't win a super bowl with the cowboys barring injury or retirement. Well at some point he is going to retire. And it might come sooner than later. So all you did was cover yourself when he eventually retires without winning one.

It's a suckers bet.

I meant to write "didn't you say bye to me too", yet you responded to me again. Do you think I'm just going to let you continue mock me with your BS?

I don't care if you didn't offer up to leave or not. I made a bet that put the burden on me according to all of the anti-Romo crowd. That I would leave if he fails to win a SB barring injury or retirement. The last should have been more explicit in that I meant (voluntary) retirement, meaning he just decides to quit and not play the game anymore even though he still can like Barry Sanders.

But, hey I'll just say barring injury. Take it or leave it.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by Ender

Ummm, if the cowboys scored early in that game, got a 2 or 3. Possession lead, the redskins probably wouldn't have ran for 250 + yards. So how does throwing early picks, on in the red zone, the other while the team was moving the ball well, not alte the game. It can alter play calling so yea it matters..

You see, you have to understand football to get what you are saying. But you are 100% correct. He just doesn't understand it enough to comprehend it.

[ufcrules1]

Originally Posted by cml750

Well it seems Brandt has finally crossed the line of senility. To tell you the truth, it would serve some of you guys right to lose Romo. You guys have such short memories. Good QB's do not grow on trees. Romo is a good QB. When you have an offensive coordinator like garrett who has zero situational awareness and is totally and completely incapable of making adjustments, then ANY QB can have bad games. Actually, due to Garrett's lack of adjustment to all the blitzers coming free to Romo, it is truly amazing he didn't throw more interceptions. We did our best this year when Romo took control of the offense in the hurry up. When Garrett ran the offense we sucked. We would not have even sniffed the playoffs without Tony Romo.

Tony... is that you? How anyone on earth could blame ANYONE other than Romo for this loss is beyond me. He had one of his classic meltdown games in prime time AGAIN. Yes, JG sucks, JJ sucks, and Romo is a choke artist.

[rcaldw]

Originally Posted by cml750

You guys are just totally and completely CLUELESS.

No sir... you are. And if you are posting on your dad's account you are going to be in big trouble.

[SultanOfSix]

Originally Posted by Ender

Ummm, if the cowboys scored early in that game, got a 2 or 3. Possession lead, the redskins probably wouldn't have ran for 250 + yards. So how does throwing early picks, on in the red zone, the other while the team was moving the ball well, not alte the game. It can alter play calling so yea it matters..

Ifs, ands, or buts, are not part of the game. If the Cowboys went up 14-0 in the first quarter, the Skins could have come back and tied it too. The last time I checked, the Cowboys weren't that great in scoring in the first half of the past six games. The Cowboys were still up 7-0 in the game after these mistakes. Such mistakes early in the game don't significantly alter the game. There is still a lot of football left to play where a lot of things can happen. Even Collinsworth said that Garrett must be ecstatic because they're going into the game tied at half and they've played much better in the second half of games.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by SultanOfSix

I meant to write "didn't you say bye to me too", yet you responded to me again. Do you think I'm just going to let you continue mock me with your BS?

I don't care if you didn't offer up to leave or not. I made a bet that put the burden on me according to all of the anti-Romo crowd. That I would leave if he fails to win a SB barring injury or retirement. The last should have been more explicit in that I meant (voluntary) retirement, meaning he just decides to quit and not play the game anymore even though he still can like Barry Sanders.

But, hey I'll just say barring injury. Take it or leave it.

Because you said you were done. I said bye. Didn't know you would really didn't mean done as in done, but done as in not really done.

Plus you are so easy to mock here. So why not. You call people chicken for not taking a suckers bet. And it wasn't even a bet. You just said you would do it if....

Anyway, here's a better one. If the temperature somewhere in Arizona reaches above 50 degrees today you leave the forum forever. If the temperature somewhere in Alaska gets about 1,000 degrees, I'll leave the forum.

Come on chicken, take the bet.

[ufcrules1]

Cajun, just put him on ignore. I just did. Eventually we become the dumb ones if we argue with him.

[DOUBLE WING]

Of all the people involved in this situation who need to part ways with the team, Romo is the last one we should be trying to get rid of.

Ditch Romo but let Garrett and Jerry Jones stay in their current positions?

That's franchise suicide.

I'm tired of hearing about Romo's record in one and done games. Most of those are on the road, where he carried poor football teams that had no business even sniffing the playoffs to having a chance to get there. Without Romo's near perfect play in the second half this year, our season would have been over weeks ago.

[SultanOfSix]

Originally Posted by Cajuncowboy

Because you said you were done. I said bye. Didn't know you would really didn't mean done as in done, but done as in not really done.

Plus you are so easy to mock here. So why not. You call people chicken for not taking a suckers bet. And it wasn't even a bet. You just said you would do it if....

Anyway, here's a better one. If the temperature somewhere in Arizona reaches above 50 degrees today you leave the forum forever. If the temperature somewhere in Alaska gets about 1,000 degrees, I'll leave the forum.

Come on chicken, take the bet.

This has got to be the worst analogy of the bet ever.

ROFL.

ROFL.

[Ender]

Originally Posted by SultanOfSix

Ifs, ands, or buts, are not part of the game. If the Cowboys went up 14-0, the Skins could have come back and tied it too. The Cowboys were still up 7-0 in the game. Such mistakes early in the game don't significantly alter the game. There is still a lot of football left to play where a lot of things can happen.

What your saying makes no sense. How does not scoring not alter a game in which the team with the most points win? So your saying not scoring only hurts the team in late game situations? So turning the ball over in scoring opportunities only hurt late in the game? That's silly.

[ufcrules1]

Originally Posted by DOUBLE WING

Of all the people involved in this situation who need to part ways with the team, Romo is the last one we should be trying to get rid of.

Ditch Romo but let Garrett and Jerry Jones stay in their current positions?

That's franchise suicide.

I'm tired of hearing about Romo's record in one and done games. Most of those are on the road, where he carried poor football teams that had no business even sniffing the playoffs to having a chance to get there.

Anyway we can get rid of all 3 of them? They all majorly suck.

[cml750]

Originally Posted by Ender

I'm not the most knowledgable fan. But it's hard for me to blame Garrett for Romos descion making. Im sure the QB has a lot to do with making adjustments and seeing blitzes. That's on Romo. It's hard for me not to believe a good QB would have killed the skins while they were sending all put blitzes. I'm sorry, as bad as Garrett is sometimes, you can't pin Romos short comings on him.

It is truly amazing how easily people forget the years between Aikman and Romo. We would have had a 3-5 wins if it weren't for Romo. Who pray tell do we replace him with when we cut ties? We might as well cut him, we aren't going anywhere with the Red Headed Idiot running the show. When he is gone, people may come to realize just how good we had it.

[SultanOfSix]

Originally Posted by Ender

What your saying makes no sense. How does not scoring not alter a game in which the team with the most points win? So your saying not scoring only hurts the team in late game situations? So turning the ball over in scoring opportunities only hurt late in the game? That's silly.

It makes perfect sense. It hurts the team, yes. But it doesn't significantly alter the game, especially that early in the game.

[Cajuncowboy]

Originally Posted by SultanOfSix

Ifs, ands, or buts, are not part of the game. If the Cowboys went up 14-0 in the first quarter, the Skins could have come back and tied it too. The last time I checked, the Cowboys weren't that great in scoring in the first half of the past six games. The Cowboys were still up 7-0 in the game after these mistakes. Such mistakes early in the game don't significantly alter the game. There is still a lot of football left to play where a lot of things can happen. Even Collinsworth said that Garrett must be ecstatic because they're going into the game tied at half and they've played much better in the second half of games.

So when going in for a score and you turn the ball over it doesn't alter the game. Holy crap. People this is sheer brilliance right here. Vince Lombardi reincarnate.