If you had it to do all over with Romo and Dak in 2016

[TheMarathonContinues]

the romo hurt is real. lmao. they're the guys in Mcdonald's hollering and making a scene because the shake-making isn't working. lmao

Boooo try again lol.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

That's one way of describing barely over 50% comp and 2 ints.

Because he wasn't trying. You can't make this stuff up.

No one was trying. Wasn't just Dak...nobody gave a damn about that game but Romo who was trying to show he could still play and he lit up some Eagirls backups to do it. I like how y'all pretend like the year prior Romo didn't have a 79 QB Rating and more interceptions than touchdowns....but in your mind...he was the missing link lol....

 

[buybuydandavis]

Going back to 2016.

Even though Romo probably would have crumbled on the next sack he took, a part of me will always wonder what would have happened if Romo had been given a chance to gain his starting job back during the second half of the 2016 season.

Not saying that there was a chance in hell of that ever happening, but I do believe that if Romo had gotten the opportunity and if he could somehow have stayed healthy for the rest of the season, I do somehow believe he would have taken the Cowboys to the SB.

Something about that one series drive he had against the Eagles that made it look too easy. He looked like he was playing golf.

Knowing now that Dak was going to become just an above average QB, any regrets for not giving Romo one last shot?

I regretted it at the time.
Going with Romo would have given us *two* bites at a franchise QB. And in Romo's case, an elite QB *that year*. Tony had played MVP level in 2014. He himself said he feel that he "figured it out" midway into 2013.

2016, if we bring Romo back:
And Romo breaks:
Dak would have lost some snaps, but he'd step back in and be our QB for the future. Done. Romo would have been done and we wouldn't have that sad scene of Jerry shopping Romo and failing.

And Romo *doesn't* break:
Romo has the best oline and RB of his career. He may still be MVP level. Unlikely he looks like anything less than a quality franchise QB. A healthy Romo playing near 2014 levels would have been a much better shot at a Championship than rookie Dak, who was playing fantastic *for a rookie*, but still wasn't the QB that Romo had been.

If we don't win a championship, we go into the 2017 offseason with *2* franchise QBs. We trade one and have a better team in 2017. We could have gotten simply a crazy haul for Dak. As I said at the time, his rookie contract had become the most valuable contract in the league. He wasn't a better QB than Tony, but his *contract* was best in the league.

Playing Romo was just the *better* move.

I'm convinced Garrett shafted Romo to monkey branch himself to Dak and a new contract. Having Dak shine under Garrett gave us a reason to keep Garrett, while it always made sense to me inevitable that we'd dump Garrett for a fresh start when Romo retired.

 

[Captain-Crash]

I regretted it at the time.
Going with Romo would have given us *two* bites at a franchise QB. And in Romo's case, an elite QB *that year*. Tony had played MVP level in 2014. He himself said he feel that he "figured it out" midway into 2013.

2016, if we bring Romo back:
And Romo breaks:
Dak would have lost some snaps, but he'd step back in and be our QB for the future. Done. Romo would have been done and we wouldn't have that sad scene of Jerry shopping Romo and failing.

And Romo *doesn't* break:
Romo has the best oline and RB of his career. He may still be MVP level. Unlikely he looks like anything less than a quality franchise QB. A healthy Romo playing near 2014 levels would have been a much better shot at a Championship than rookie Dak, who was playing fantastic *for a rookie*, but still wasn't the QB that Romo had been.

If we don't win a championship, we go into the 2017 offseason with *2* franchise QBs. We trade one and have a better team in 2017. We could have gotten simply a crazy haul for Dak. As I said at the time, his rookie contract had become the most valuable contract in the league. He wasn't a better QB than Tony, but his *contract* was best in the league.

Playing Romo was just the *better* move.

I'm convinced Garrett shafted Romo to monkey branch himself to Dak and a new contract. Having Dak shine under Garrett gave us a reason to keep Garrett, while it always made sense to me inevitable that we'd dump Garrett for a fresh start when Romo retired.

romo wouldn't listen to Garrett and his stupid offensive plays. "Garretts not much on x's and o's" Why should he? oh, Jason was the next Landry and jerry was holding him back. now Jason is shining in some kids pee wee league now.

 

[nobody]

What? Eagles sucked that game. Dak and the team didn’t even try to win that game. Romo was the only one trying lol.

I disagree. Dak always tries.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I disagree. Dak always tries.

THE objective for that game was for guys not to get hurt. That was the first mission. Backups like Romo? They were playing for next season. But it didn't fool anyone. Everyone knew he was cooked.

 

[nobody]

THE objective for that game was for guys not to get hurt. That was the first mission. Backups like Romo? They were playing for next season. But it didn't fool anyone. Everyone knew he was cooked.

I agree he was done. That doesn't mean he wasn't overall a better QB skill-wise. Dak was the future however.

 

[Kingofholland]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/do-...the-next-game-or-stick-with-dak-ended.365924/

Just for fun, majority said Dak but lot closer than I would think. I still don't see how the Cowboys riding a 13-3 record could consider a switch to Romo. If they were a wild card and Dak was struggling where the team dropped 4 of the last 5 I could understand a switch but not the case.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I agree he was done. That doesn't mean he wasn't overall a better QB skill-wise. Dak was the future however.

I can't say he was better. It could've been true. I think we ASSUMED Romo we saw in 2014 was the one we would've got in 2016....I don't assume that though. He wasn't very sharp in 2015 when he did play.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/do-...the-next-game-or-stick-with-dak-ended.365924/

Just for fun, majority said Dak but lot closer than I would think. I still don't see how the Cowboys riding a 13-3 record could consider a switch to Romo. If they were a wild card and Dak was struggling where the team dropped 4 of the last 5 I could understand a switch but not the case.

For the Cowboys to go back to Romo...that would've been such a Jerry move....and I expected him to do it. Really shocked at the time they didn't go back to Romo.

 

[nobody]

For the Cowboys to go back to Romo...that would've been such a Jerry move....and I expected him to do it. Really shocked at the time they didn't go back to Romo.

What surprised me honestly was that after 2016, Romo asked for a QB contest and it was rejected. I think it was a Stephen Jones and Garrett move... I think they convinced Jerry. For salary cap reasons since Romo couldn't stay healthy. As good as Romo was, he was snake bit. Unfortunately, it is looking like Dak might be heading that way but he still has time to fix things.

 

[Rayman70]

I think in the end, it was the right move. I would have loved to have hung on to Tony 1 more year though, almost like a player/coach for Dak. I think when he retired like he did, it hurt Dak. Tony had a gift of diagnosing what the defense was giving him as far as disguising coverages. Dak not so much. Kitna helped Dak in that regard too. Dak regressed when they were let go. One more season with Tony might have helped Dak and his growth immensely.

 

[Rayman70]

What surprised me honestly was that after 2016, Romo asked for a QB contest and it was rejected. I think it was a Stephen Jones and Garrett move... I think they convinced Jerry. For salary cap reasons since Romo couldn't stay healthy. As good as Romo was, he was snake bit. Unfortunately, it is looking like Dak might be heading that way but he still has time to fix things.

^AGREE. It would have been nice to see what might have been for 1 more year with him there.

 

[DandyDon52]

No one was trying. Wasn't just Dak...nobody gave a damn about that game but Romo who was trying to show he could still play and he lit up some Eagirls backups to do it. I like how y'all pretend like the year prior Romo didn't have a 79 QB Rating and more interceptions than touchdowns....but in your mind...he was the missing link lol....

The year prior he played what 2 1/2 games then came back not healed for 1 1/2 games. had no star RB after murray left
if you want to compare dak and romo, compare romo 2014 to dak 2016 , about the same teams same coaches. both good years.

 

[Vtwin]

No one was trying. Wasn't just Dak...nobody gave a damn about that game but Romo who was trying to show he could still play and he lit up some Eagirls backups to do it. I like how y'all pretend like the year prior Romo didn't have a 79 QB Rating and more interceptions than touchdowns....but in your mind...he was the missing link lol....

lol

 

[DandyDon52]

What surprised me honestly was that after 2016, Romo asked for a QB contest and it was rejected. I think it was a Stephen Jones and Garrett move... I think they convinced Jerry. For salary cap reasons since Romo couldn't stay healthy. As good as Romo was, he was snake bit. Unfortunately, it is looking like Dak might be heading that way but he still has time to fix things.

Tony should have came back the last 2 games of season, and playoffs, and if he wasnt doing well or got hurt, put dak back in.
As far as cap concerns, dak was drafted to be romo's bkup , and was # 3 to start.. so they were planning on romo for the near future, and kellen and dak were just bkups.

Romo gets hurt by freak hit, and dak did good, winning a bunch in a row. which should have elevated him to # 2 and the guy who would take over after Romo.

But jones boys got greedy, (billionaires tend to get that way lol) they wanted the brand new guy who was dirt cheap, 4th round pick pay, jettison tony and have more money to
spend to build a even better team ! a super bowl team lol , and we all know how that worked out, never got past the div round.

Tony for all the years and injuries, should have been given the end of the 2016 season to finish his career. And if he got hurt, dak still comes in, if he played really badly
could still put dak in, they owed him a shot, but with no class jones boys they would not do that, not even let him compete for his job back.

And for those who say the locker room wanted dak, well who the heck runs the team, the hc' jones boys or the locker room?

Romo couldn't stay healthy.....thats is wrong, he broke his collarbone, doctors clear him way too early and it breaks again!
The seattle injury next season, was a freak hit which hurt his back. Tony said he was ready to play 4 weeks later, but dak by then was on a roll and he was then either
strangely not cleared to play or was simply secretly demoted to bkup. By the time they officially demoted him to bkup, he said he hadnt felt that good in years, and was
ready physically to play, more so than any time in recent years. But like I say jones boys saw dak as a guy who was dirt cheap, a guy who they could easily manipulate lol
a guy they could extend cheaply lol and a guy who could win 12 or more games per year.

Well dak wasnt so easy to manipulate and year he extended cheaply lol and he has had 3 years of 12 wins, but got no further than romo in playoffs.

And after dak showed what he could do, in 2016 he was going to be the one to replace tony, they just did it too soon.

 

[DallasEast]

Tom Brady, the greatest quarterback of all-time, has only reached the Super Bowl ten times during his (currently) 22-year career. A true legend in his own time, Brady led New England and Tampa teams to title appearances 45% as a veteran and never as a rookie.

Tom Terrific (vomit) is one of only a few NFL players, including solely quarterbacks) who can argue their teams had more ample opportunities to play for a championship than their peers. Certainly, in the nearly 60-year era of the Super Bowl, an overwhelming number of professional players would judge their championship appearance opportunities as slim-to-none.

NFL head coaches, even Ivy League educated ones, know this.

NFL general managers, even someone hailing from the great state of Arkansas, know this as well.

Jason Garrett and Jerry Jones make a decision in 2016. Was the decision based primarily for long-term or short-term goals?

Did they know (or care) former playoff rookie quarterbacks Joe Flacco, Shaun King, Pat Haden, Dieter Brock, Mark Sanchez and even Ben Roethlisberger, who helped Pittsburgh win the championship as a second-year veteran, were 0-6 of reaching the Super Bowl in their first year?

Perhaps they did know and thought to themselves their rookie quarterback and team was better than all those rookie QBs and their teams mentioned above. After all, they watched the team finish with the second best regular season record in the league and best record in the NFC. The rest of their NFC playoff field featured the:

• Lions, NFC North runner-up, who were beaten 42-21 in Week 16
• Giants, NFC East runner-up, whom they were swept by in Weeks 1 and 14
• Packers, NFC North champions, beaten 30-16 in Week 6
• Falcons, 11-5 NFC South champions
• Seahawks, 10-5-1 NFC West champions

2-2 in head-to-head matchups. Not as impressive as the regular season record but definitely winnable. Atlanta and Seattle were not fearsome looking opponents either. So, bucking the odds and rolling the dice exclusively with a rookie quarterback-led team was the choice.

Or

Was it hoping the regular season hotness would not be doused with a bucket of ice water? With one of the consolation prizes of the gamble giving your rookie quarterback real, live, battle-tested, on-the-field playoff experience--netting another potentially Roethlisberger-like quality Super Bowl challenging veteran in the process?

Was the first option the only consideration that season? I mean, who would gamble upon one of those actual rare Super Bowl contending opportunities franchises (and their fans) dream about?

crap

 

[starfan1]

Yep...I know you're talking about me. It's fine...if defending Romo from the myths and lies fans have built in their head is "butthurt" well then color me hurt.

I never create these kinds of threads all I have to do is wait for some idiot to claim Romo is a choker. The stats everyone want to see inconveniently (for them) show otherwise and they show their true colors by ignoring them.

I'm okay with "moving on" It is what it is. . *I* also do not get "butthurt" with discussion about it. People can say their piece either way...but Imma step in when the lies start.

It's HILARIOUS the same people that defend Dak with "it's a team game" blast Romo for his playoff record. Total and complete hypocrites.

You aren't that important hate to disappoint you. You do however fall into a category i described. But you're one of several that just cant let it go.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Romo was physically compromised and the Cowboys were on an all-decade hot streak under Dak. I would have made the same call Garrett did.

When is the last time Romo had even finished a game at that point? He was knocked out early on in week 2, rushed back, re-injured himself immediately, and then went down in the first quarter of a preseason game. He didn't have 2 months of gas in the tank, it was a legitimate question if he had 2 quarters.

From a results perspective, Dak's early exit is known, and Romo's 2016 playoff run is unknown. A perpetually disappointed Cowboys fanbase can always lean on the what-if of Romo hosting a Lombardi. But from a process perspective, of what the Cowboys knew in Nov 2016 and nothing else, the team made the right call.

 

[MarcusRock]

Tom Brady, the greatest quarterback of all-time, has only reached the Super Bowl ten times during his (currently) 22-year career. A true legend in his own time, Brady led New England and Tampa teams to title appearances 45% as a veteran and never as a rookie.

Tom Terrific (vomit) is one of only a few NFL players, including solely quarterbacks) who can argue their teams had more ample opportunities to play for a championship than their peers. Certainly, in the nearly 60-year era of the Super Bowl, an overwhelming number of professional players would judge their championship appearance opportunities as slim-to-none.

NFL head coaches, even Ivy League educated ones, know this.

NFL general managers, even someone hailing from the great state of Arkansas, know this as well.

Jason Garrett and Jerry Jones make a decision in 2016. Was the decision based primarily for long-term or short-term goals?

Did they know (or care) former playoff rookie quarterbacks Joe Flacco, Shaun King, Pat Haden, Dieter Brock, Mark Sanchez and even Ben Roethlisberger, who helped Pittsburgh win the championship as a second-year veteran, were 0-6 of reaching the Super Bowl in their first year?

Perhaps they did know and thought to themselves their rookie quarterback and team was better than all those rookie QBs and their teams mentioned above. After all, they watched the team finish with the second best regular season record in the league and best record in the NFC. The rest of their NFC playoff field featured the:

• Lions, NFC North runner-up, who were beaten 42-21 in Week 16
• Giants, NFC East runner-up, whom they were swept by in Weeks 1 and 14
• Packers, NFC North champions, beaten 30-16 in Week 6
• Falcons, 11-5 NFC South champions
• Seahawks, 10-5-1 NFC West champions

2-2 in head-to-head matchups. Not as impressive as the regular season record but definitely winnable. Atlanta and Seattle were not fearsome looking opponents either. So, bucking the odds and rolling the dice exclusively with a rookie quarterback-led team was the choice.

Or

Was it hoping the regular season hotness would not be doused with a bucket of ice water? With one of the consolation prizes of the gamble giving your rookie quarterback real, live, battle-tested, on-the-field playoff experience--netting another potentially Roethlisberger-like quality Super Bowl challenging veteran in the process?

Was the first option the only consideration that season? I mean, who would gamble upon one of those actual rare Super Bowl contending opportunities franchises (and their fans) dream about?

crap

Or perhaps they remembered that Dak beat Green Bay at Lambeau that very same season. You think they considered that at all? Lol.

By this antiquated "never been done before" logic, of your rookie QB is 17-0 during the season, you better sit him for the playoffs if you have a pretty good veteran on the team because, you know, no rookie's ever gone all the way before.

Gotta love slant.