Romo would've won it

dstovall5 said:
What if I told you those years were the minority, would you care? Just because he has had a good defense for 2 years or so doesn't mean that's been the case for the majority of his career.
Click to expand...
What are you arguing about anyways? So we're clear, I'm saying that Romo has no excuses because he's had good defenses or average defenses in his career and still could not get it done. Just because his defense sucked this year is another excuse along with the other million his lovers have come up with.
 
Clove said:
Some teams know how to win, others don't. Some quarterbacks are clutch, others are not. Some coaches can coach, others can't. I watched a high scoring Super Bowl a couple of years back, defense basically did nothing. Quarterbacks stepped up, won the game. Win at all cost, no excuses.
Click to expand...
It's a simple matter of distinguishing parts from a whole.
 
Romo is 1-6 in these type of games and we are supposed to believe he would have won this game? LOL
 
this year alone, records of the teams with worse defensive qb rating going into wk 17.

4-11
4-11
3-12
4-10-1
8-7
4-11
7-7-1
2-13
 
Clove said:
What are you arguing about anyways? So we're clear, I'm saying that Romo has no excuses because he's had good defenses or average defenses in his career and still could not get it done. Just because his defense sucked this year is another excuse along with the other million his lovers have come up with.
Click to expand...

You said no undrafted QB has ever won a super bowl, and in response I said no defense as bad as ours has won one either.

And if you think 2-3 years/chances is enough for a QB to win a super bowl, then that's completely laughable. Even great QBs have more chances than 2-3 times, so why would you expect Romo to be able to get it done in that situation? Hell, look at Joe Flacco, he's just an average QB. But his defense continuously carried him to the playoffs, and he finally got on a hot streak and they won a super bowl.

Chances are, if we were to make the playoffs every year, Romo would've gotten hot one year and made a deep playoff run. All Romo needs is an average defense and coaching staff, but apparently that's too much to ask for. :confused:
 
Eagles got lucky. Those two turnovers really hurt us. Orton played a good game. Has such a quick release unlike Romo, who holds onto to the ball forever. Same results though. But we paid Orton much less. I guess the spirit of Romo was on the field on that last play.
 
dstovall5 said:
You said no undrafted QB has ever won a super bowl, and in response I said no defense as bad as ours has won one either.

And if you think 2-3 years/chances is enough for a QB to win a super bowl, then that's completely laughable. Even great QBs have more chances than 2-3 times, so why would you expect Romo to be able to get it done in that situation? Hell, look at Joe Flacco, he's just an average QB. But his defense continuously carried him to the playoffs, and he finally got on a hot streak and they won a super bowl.

Chances are, if we were to make the playoffs every year, Romo would've gotten hot one year and made a deep playoff run. All Romo needs is an average defense and coaching staff, but apparently that's too much to ask for. :confused:
Click to expand...

Romo is 35 with a bad back, and is regressing each year. We have got to admit that Romos time as a starter is coming to a quick end.
 
Animosity said:
Eagles got lucky. Those two turnovers really hurt us. Orton played a good game. Has such a quick release unlike Romo, who holds onto to the ball forever. Same results though. But we paid Orton much less. I guess the spirit of Romo was on the field on that last play.
Click to expand...

we scored 12 points less then our home average. not the same results. for a backup qb, I was pleased with 22 points, but it is the season low at home for a reason. we were playing with less talent at qb.
 
dstovall5 said:
You said no undrafted QB has ever won a super bowl, and in response I said no defense as bad as ours has won one either.

And if you think 2-3 years/chances is enough for a QB to win a super bowl, then that's completely laughable. Even great QBs have more chances than 2-3 times, so why would you expect Romo to be able to get it done in that situation? :confused:
Click to expand...
I'd settle for being in the playoffs every year. Is that too much to ask? If so, we've sunk as a fan base to a new low.
 
Animosity said:
Eagles got lucky. Those two turnovers really hurt us. Orton played a good game. Has such a quick release unlike Romo, who holds onto to the ball forever. Same results though. But we paid Orton much less. I guess the spirit of Romo was on the field on that last play.
Click to expand...

Romo has one of the quickest releases in football, and he's able to hold onto the ball longer because he's actually somewhat athletic. He has great feet movement and is able to dance around the pocket creating time, Orton, not so much.
 
Eric_Boyer said:
we scored 12 points less then our home average. not the same results. for a backup qb, I was pleased with 22 points, but it is the season low at home for a reason. we were playing with less talent at qb.
Click to expand...

No correlation between the 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 37 more.
Total: 3,332 (members: 137, guests: 3,195)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,761
Messages
13,830,102
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top