Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Arkyvarminter, Jul 18, 2014.
Try putting the * beside the 8-8 season the Cowboys have had. smh
Why doesn't one instead mention that he played collegiately in Illinois...it would means as much. Oh, and the asterisk would work either way.
Aliright, I'm 65, who has the krustiest boxers?
As presented originally, a reason beyond a stand alone opinion was given. That allowed for an expansion of more proximal causes...but if view is then the final resting place.
My wife does my laundry...so, mine aren't krusty.
The moon. The stars.
Why is it a silly stat? Certainly the pressure is on in those situations so at the very least it is an indicator. Even if some of the other top QB's arent in the situation as often, whenever they are its a very similar type of situation with the game on the line.
Staubach seemed to be better in the 4th quarter than a lot of his peers. Who won more in comeback fashion than him in his day? Does that mean all the other QB's just did better throughout the games so their teams didnt need to win it at the end? Are we to assume that all of Roger's comebacks were just a silly stat type thing and ultimately meaningless? I dont think so. I think it indicates he was pretty good under the pressure when everything was on the line. Maybe Romo's pretty good too, but some dont want to acknowledge it.
Everybody posting here doesnt have the ability to recognize this
If you are attacking at night, as was the case in Gaza...you don't want a philosophical hindrance of those giving up where a night vision gives you advantage. Illumination removes even the stars and moon...as to a wisdom meeting application.
As to the moon, it is still made of cheese with footprints now...the stars on Dallas will be fine.
OH, and I'm fine with a rather large group of reclamation projects on the team. They love football, and they now love the Cowboys. They aren't dysfunctional, whether in character projection or denial of which. They add to the team, and improve the window in the now for the Cowboys. For they are lead by quite capable mentors, and don't have to wander around looking for a yoda.
22 guys and their backups playing as a team.
You can assume whatever you want.
It's silly because it doesn't say anything other than the outcome of particular games.
I'm sure Romo was also credited with a 4QC and a game winning drive against Pittsburgh when Carr intercepted the ball and returned it to the 1 yard line.
And generally speaking, playing well through 3 quarters precludes any possible comeback.
One of these days I'm going to put together a list of all the former and current players, reports from various front office people around the league (usually anonymous), etc.. who have expressed doubts about Romo. To suggest that no one knowledgable doubts he has the ability to lead the team to the Super Bowl is flat out silly.
What is silly to me are the endless streams of "Tony isn't the problem" threads. Who are we trying to convince? Ourselves? I will be happy when they stop. Either he will have put the idea to bed by shutting the mouths of his critics, or it will mean we have moved on to the next chapter. Either way, until then, it just does no good to debate it. I know we debate a whole range of things that we aren't settling on a forum like this. I get that. But this one just seems worn out to me. My simple approach is that I believe he is a good QB. I hope he stays healthy this season. I am rooting for a playoff birth. I hope he plays his best football in the biggest moments this year. I'm looking forward to the season.
We all hope he plays his best in the biggest moments because we are all Cowboys fans. It's just some of us have given up after 8 years of him shrinking in elimination/playoff games.
And that other part you left out - the QB's role in said outcome.
Please provide us with that list. I can't wait to hear from "front office people around the league".
One was on here just a week or two ago and there were another 30, thousand post, threads in defense of Romo that followed (exaggeration on purpose). You see it from time to time, just stay awake.
As I said, I think its all silly, on both sides of the aisle. His performance will speak for itself when it is all over.
That's hogwash. If they make such a claim, why can't they put their name to it? Spineless. I'm still waiting of a list with names. If he's so bad, then there should be a plethora. The best you or anyone else is going to find is maybe 2 or 3 out of hundreds of front office people.
That list would be extremely short compared to the ones that have voiced the exact opposite.
A really bad idea, if you're trying to bash Romo.
Generally (not 100% always! but the vast majority of the time) the higher level the knowledge about the position, the stronger the support for him becomes.
Here is one where 180 NFL players named Romo the 2nd most overrated player in the NFL.
The article disagreed with the players and defended Romo. Again, I'm not defending the poll, I was simply responding to the idea that no one who is knowledgeable could doubt that Romo is Super Bowl quality.
I think you are missing my point. What I was responding to is the idea that NO ONE who is knowledgeable could doubt him. That's just silly.
More hogwash. Being overrated and not being good enough to lead a team to a championship is 2 different things. And his being overrated is due to all the attention he gets from the idiots in the media. Both POSITIVE and NEGATIVE.