10 years ago today Romo suffered a back injury in the preseason, paving the way for Dak

DallasEast said:
You didn't. I apologize. Allow me to re-reply to your comment:


Yes. Burrow was an older rookie. Yet a rookie's age did not prevent other teams in other seasons from starting their younger quarterbacks. Age played a part for his maturation but that was a specific but not unique evaluation gauge used for Burrow.


True. Other rookie quarterbacks (not all but some) have been drafted high in the first round and were consider pro ready. It made sense for their teams to start them as well.
Click to expand...
I bring up Burrow's age because he was pro ready and going to start. I didnt' see him sitting long. But I mean he also just came off a National Championship he was starting whether he was 21 or 25.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
Hello erod (lol)

Click to expand...

This is interesting. Shotty said it didn't necessarily light a fire he felt confident in his own game. I think they kind of twisted what McClay said. I don't think Howell motivated Milton to get better but I am not opposed to keeping both. Both have looked good. Just depends what am I losing if I keep him.
 
TheMarathonContinues said:
I bring up Burrow's age because he was pro ready and going to start. I didnt' see him sitting long. But I mean he also just came off a National Championship he was starting whether he was 21 or 25.
Click to expand...
I understand your point. I only hope you understand that I am saying it is a pretty common occurrence for teams to start their first-round drafted quarterbacks their rookie season before they draft them. First round drafted quarterbacks are generally considered planned franchise-caliber quarterbacks to help solidify their offenses over a (hoped for) long-term.

That is why I am trying to convey Joe Burrow's starting is not atypical, regardless of his age or college pedigree. It has been an easily acknowledged standard for drafting first-round quarterbacks, especially during the past three decades at minimum.
 
TheMarathonContinues said:
This is interesting. Shotty said it didn't necessarily light a fire he felt confident in his own game. I think they kind of twisted what McClay said. I don't think Howell motivated Milton to get better but I am not opposed to keeping both. Both have looked good. Just depends what am I losing if I keep him.
Click to expand...
Have you seen Howell's stats from his 17-game season with the Commanders? 21 interceptions, 21 TDs, sacked 65 times, and 42.3 QBR.

I think they are trying to figure out just how good Milton can be.........does he have a future as an NFL starting QB?
 
G2 said:
Wrong, the "10 years" was in reference to Prescott.
Apples to Apples or don't attempt a comparison. Not only that, Prescott isn't retired. No one's fault Romo sat the bench for years.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing wrong about it. You’re just deflecting and being disingenuous now. The poster clearly remarked that it’s been ten seasons since Dak became the starting QB and pointed out that has resulted in merely two playoff victories. You then replied with Romo playing for 14 years and implying that he didn’t fare any better trying to diminish him with respect to Dak as if he played longer as a starter (which is clearly not true) and ended with the same amount of playoff victories. It’s an apple to apples comparison because that is what your retort was clearly focused on.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
Have you seen Howell's stats from his 17-game season with the Commanders? 21 interceptions, 21 TDs, sacked 65 times, and 42.3 QBR.

I think they are trying to figure out just how good Milton can be.........does he have a future as an NFL starting QB?
Click to expand...
I did. I can't judge the guy based on the Commanders though. Poor situation and poor team and poor front office. I like guys like him.

I'm not a fan of the Cooper Rush guys who are steady but do nothing to win. Howell good or bad is going to go out there and try to win. If it ends in an interception oh well. I can appreciate that. He's going to utilize all the tools he has.

I like Milton as well. I just question when the deep pass isn't there and the pass rush is what do I have? Your legs and deep pass are a small percentage of the offense. I need to see how you handle the tight window throws.
 
DallasEast said:
The team went 13-3. I am uncertain what other teams' regular season records have been when their offenses were led by rookie quarterbacks, but teams winning regular season and postseason games with rookie quarterbacks had already been done.

Teams winning or competing in a Super Bowl with a rookie quarterback had never been done, has never been done since 2016, and is extremely likely to never be done. There was a zero percent change of this franchise winning or playing in Super LI the moments both Tony Romo and Kellen Moore fell to injury and the permanent decision was made to stay with a rookie quarterback. The possibility may have also been near zero if Romo had not gotten injured, but that near impossibility was greater than none.

There will be disagreements, but Jerry Jones' decision to fully commit to a new franchise quarterback by late October was the best long-term outcome in regard to positional change. Romo's era was finished in his opinion. Jones' QB acquisition history had long established he would stick with his decision for years--an observation which several members here had the foresight of mentioning repeatedly.

It is 2026. Veteran quarterbacks help their teams compete in and win Super Bowls. Dallas has an 11-year veteran at the position. Here's hoping he and his teammates can make a successful run at Super Bowl LXI.
Click to expand...
The one time I agreed with Jerry. I never thought we had a shot with Romo anyway and He was starting to miss seasons with injuries. Of course 10 years later and nothing has changed.
 
PA Cowboy Fan said:
The one time I agreed with Jerry. I never thought we had a shot with Romo anyway and He was starting to miss seasons with injuries. Of course 10 years later and nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
Yeah I honestly don't even think that was Jerry's move but I also don't know. I know Garrett was in on it. I suspect Stephen was too. I suspect Jerry would've given Romo one last shot that year if he had his way.

I remember that year wanting to go back to Romo when it initially was like a 5 or 6 week injury. Then it became a "wait and see" every week and at that point I was over it. Just stick with Dak.

I think the correct decision was to what the team wanted. I think you have to. You don't want your team making front office decisions but with quarterback it's different. I think with Dak he just played that game very well. Romo never did or could. Dak bonded with that whole locker room and hell even the front office. He did what many won't do. I think it made the decision easier for them.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
This I agree......coz we know he will see the kitchen sink in real games.
Click to expand...
Yeah and he has some mobility. Very weird....I've heard it before but man he really has everything you'd want yet it's never clicked and I get it the game is much more than physique or throwing the football.

I had a question I was gonna ask but never got around to it....I get he was extremely raw....but why did the Cowboys not even try to draft him? They'd draft DInucci types but why wouldn't you draft someone like Milton?
 
TheMarathonContinues said:
What's your actual point here? Please stay on topic and don't deflect. Thanks.
Click to expand...
The actual point has been clearly communicated and supported with evidence. Not sure I can simplify enough for you to understand but here goes one last try. Prescott started his career on a very good team. Top notch offense and a defense that finished 5th in pts.

That team was essentially the same roster as the 2015 team with the addition of a rookie of the year, all pro and league leading rusher as well as a healthy WR1.

This point was made in rebuttal to the asinine assertion that Prescott inherited a bad team with the only evidence to back that up being a reference to the previous season's record with no consideration to the circumstances of that record.

An additional point was made in response to your claim that QB1 being missing exposed the inferior roster in 2015. This point was made by using your own words regarding the concept of QB's carrying teams.

Does that clarify the point for you?

That's the problem with running on emotion and ego. When you post hundreds of thousands of times you forget which way your ego was leading you on any given day/month/year and you end up contradicting yourself in spectacular fashion.

Even money says he responds to this by saying some version of "I'm not reading all that lol"
 
PA Cowboy Fan said:
The one time I agreed with Jerry. I never thought we had a shot with Romo anyway and He was starting to miss seasons with injuries. Of course 10 years later and nothing has changed.
Click to expand...
As I told anyone starting in 2016, I have zero disagreement with anyone who wanted Dallas to move on from Tony Romo. Romo had his shot. New blood is a way of life in sports. The Cowboys should not be considered an exception.

lol. What I have total disagreement (not saying you) with is EVERYONE who thought and agreed that the change would support the possibility of Dallas reaching or winning the Super Bowl immediately following the 2016 season. Not 2017. Not 2018. Not 2019 to today.

No.

Super Bowl LI.

With a rookie quarterback.

It was not going to happen. That 2016 team was not that special. It was not some historical juggernaut on either side of the ball. No rookie quarterback would have helped it get to the championship game. Same goes for OTHER teams with a rookie quarterbacks.

There was one member here (I will not name him), who said almost immediately after Dak Prescott took over following Romo's injury, that (paraphrasing) "I am completely happy and satisfied we got a new quarterback finally but understand the team would not win the Super Bowl that year." I have given that particular member props many many times over the years. That was a 100% realistic viewpoint that was not uttered often during that particular season of Team Chemistry Euphoria. Why?

No rookie quarterback-led team has ever reached or won the Super Bowl since its creation. Why would anyone think differently about Super Bowl LI?

It has been ten freaking years. And I still cannot wrap my brain around that particular madness.

/rant
 
Vtwin said:
The actual point has been clearly communicated and supported with evidence. Not sure I can simplify enough for you to understand but here goes one last try. Prescott started his career on a very good team. Top notch offense and a defense that finished 5th in pts.

That team was essentially the same roster as the 2015 team with the addition of a rookie of the year, all pro and league leading rusher as well as a healthy WR1.

This point was made in rebuttal to the asinine assertion that Prescott inherited a bad team with the only evidence to back that up being a reference to the previous season's record with no consideration to the circumstances of that record.

An additional point was made in response to your claim that QB1 being missing exposed the inferior roster in 2015. This point was made by using your own words regarding the concept of QB's carrying teams.

Does that clarify the point for you?

That's the problem with running on emotion and ego. When you post hundreds of thousands of times you forget which way your ego was leading you on any given day/month/year and you end up contradicting yourself in spectacular fashion.

Even money says he responds to this by saying some version of "I'm not reading all that lol"
Click to expand...
I read it. You didn't do what you think you did.

When someone says carrying a team they aren't talking about to winning 11 games. It's to winning a SB. But you knew that.

Notice though in describing this "very good team"(see you've changed your wording there nice lol) but you don't notice how bad the GM or head coach were. As if they don't matter or equate to what an actual winner is lol.

You also don't speak on how this talent was so good a lot of them were out of the league or so after. Dez, Witten were finished. Those were your two best receiving options. Young Zeke was great. Fresh legs and all. Offensive line was great. A ideal situation those positions. But your dishonesty comes in pretending like the same issue that has plagued this team in 2015 or even 2003 or 1999 is the same. It was a flawed team. Soft team. Soft interior. I guess man this exercise was never about you being honest because you're not capable. It was just to see how far you'd go to stretch your lies.
 
I never realized it now. If we had beaten the Packers....the Falcons were the only team standing in our way to the SB. And we probably get spanked in the SB because of coaching and trying to stop Brady.....Probably our closet shot to a SB under Dak was that year.
 
Hawkeye0202 said:
Hello erod (lol)

But seriously, there's a 1000 Sam Howells out there........he wasn't brought in to win the job as much as to see if Milton was really serious about taking his game to the next level. If there was no improvement, I'm sure they would cut him in a heartbeat and take a hard look at the 2027 draft.

Click to expand...

No, he was brought here to replace him. They had given up on Milton just like everybody else.

This is a surprise to everyone, including the coaches.
 
erod said:
No, he was brought here to replace him. They had given up on Milton just like everybody else.

This is a surprise to everyone, including the coaches.
Click to expand...
They never gave up on him. That's not even the Cowboys MO....trade a 5th rounder for a guy and give up on him the year after? Now maybe they would've given up after this season but that's not their MO. Not Jerry's anyway.
 
RonWashington said:
My point you missed is drafting where the Cowboys normally draft mid round the top 2 or 3 QB’s are gone . Perhaps round 2-3 holds a QB worth taking .
Click to expand...
Good point. I’d still like Jerry to shop in round 1 (or 2) for Daks successor because IMO, Milton will never be that guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 6 more.
Total: 6,616 (members: 106, guests: 6,510)
Robots: 1,842

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
475,044
Messages
14,578,824
Members
24,214
Latest member
whoami2066
Back
Top