I'm on the Jon Kitna Bandwagon

[gimmesix]

I wouldn't "start" Vaughan but if the Cowboys were getting beat handily in a game I would yank Weeden and put Vaughan in and see how he plays. If he made some plays THEN I might consider starting him the following week if Romo were still a no go. Things would have to go consistently bad with Weeden where the team isn't competitive for me to turn to Vaughan. As long as we're in games and have a chance to win them in the 4th quarter then Weeden would be staying in if I were in charge.

So things didn't go consistently bad against Arizona? Granted, the team was down 14-10 in the third quarter, but only because of Patmon's interception return.

So does this mean according to your criteria you would have yanked Weeden in that game and went with Vaughan? If so, then you're supporting my argument. You would have put in Vaughan and if he played well, you would have considered starting him the next week. I'm glad we're on the same page.

 

[KJJ]

You say you want to give it a rest, yet you keep going. I get the feeling you are a have to have the last word kind of person.

You're the one who keeps going I'm replying to your comments. The ones who think I need to have the last word are the ones who continue to try and keep arguments going by drawing me back in with ridiculous comments. If you're going to keep baiting me back I'll keep countering. You're welcome to have the last word but don't leave me with something that deserves a response.

Not sure you're understanding me on the above quote, either. Without Romo, we have no shot at the playoffs whether we play Weeden or Vaughan. Weeden has shown in his career he wins about 1 of every 5 games he starts. That will not put us in the playoffs.

You say one thing and then another. Throughout this entire argument you been saying you want to go with Vaughan to give him some experience and see what he's got while the Cowboys are in playoff contention. No team in the league would play an undrafted rookie developmental project at QB while still in playoff contention when they have an experienced backup QB. You then turned around and said your only contention is if the Cowboys are out of playoff contention they should play Vaughan which I agree with. Try making up your mind! I agree the Cowboys will be out of the playoffs without Romo but a QB who's had 20 plus NFL starts does give the Cowboys at least a chance to stay afloat while an undrafted rookie free agent developmental QB who struggle with their reads and accuracy in the final preseason game vs bubble players doesn't. Common sense should tell you that.

Anyone who thinks if Romo is out that we should play Weeden, because that still gives us a chance of making the playoffs, is delusional.

Any experienced QB gives a team a chance to survive a few games and make the playoffs. It's happened several times in NFL history but no undrafted rookie free agent QB has ever stepped in and done it. We've seen backup QB's win SB's. What's delusional is thinking you have the same exact chance of staying alive with an undrafted rookie free agent QB who's never taken a regular season NFL snap. You're sending a bad message to your team to put in a developmental rookie QB who just suited up for the first time last week and have them attempt to lead your team on a playoff run. That would be like throwing the towel in on the season.

 

[KJJ]

So things didn't go consistently bad against Arizona? Granted, the team was down 14-10 in the third quarter, but only because of Patmon's interception return.

So does this mean according to your criteria you would have yanked Weeden in that game and went with Vaughan? If so, then you're supporting my argument. You would have put in Vaughan and if he played well, you would have considered starting him the next week. I'm glad we're on the same page.

The Cowboys had a 10-0 lead vs AZ and you consider that a game that went consistently bad? The Cowboys were still in that game into the 4th quarter. According to my criteria the Cowboys would have to be getting blown out with no opportunity to win in the 4th quarter before Vaughan would ever see the field. I'm in no way supporting your argument but you've supported mine by saying the Cowboys are going with Weeden due to his experience. If you're going to start putting spins on my comments this discussion will never end. You and I aren't even reading from the same book.

 

[KJJ]

It's amazing that someone who dwells on this elimination game crap can so blatantly defend a quarterback who sucks so much throughout the season (Weeden not Orton). Or maybe it's not amazing and should just be expected.

QB's are judged by how they play in elimination games that's why Romo's have been scrutinized. I'm defending Weeden vs an undrafted rookie free agent developmental QB who's never taken a regular season snap. If you're going to start getting nasty this discussion will end and so will any future discussions. It's obvious you're becoming frustrated so move on.

 

[burmafrd]

QB's are judged by how they play in elimination games that's why Romo's have been scrutinized. I'm defending Weeden vs an undrafted rookie free agent developmental QB who's never taken a regular season snap. If you're going to start getting nasty this discussion will end and so will any future discussions. It's obvious you're becoming frustrated so move on.

actually only haters like you call them elimination games. And you do know he has a rather good QB rating in most of those games, right?

But as a hater its always romo's fault no matter what

 

[KJJ]

That's certainly your opinion, and there may be some validity to it since Vaughan is a developmental player. However, Vaughan outplayed Weeden in the preseason (granted, against a lower level of backups), but the Cowboys were not going to make him the backup because they value experience in their backups.

You just backed up what I've been saying the Cowboys as do all teams value experience at backup QB. Vaughan didn't play well in the Cowboys final preseason game he showed poor reads and accuracy playing against fringe players. You posted you would have cut Weeden after the preseason even though Vaughan showed he's years away from being ready to lead an NFL team.

 

[BAT]

Rather be on the Brett Favre or Kurt Warner band wagon.

 

[gimmesix]

You just backed up what I've been saying the Cowboys as do all teams value experience at backup QB. Vaughan didn't play well in the Cowboys final preseason game he showed poor reads and accuracy playing against fringe players. You posted you would have cut Weeden after the preseason even though Vaughan showed he's years away from being ready to lead an NFL team.

I would have cut Weeden after the preseason because he showed he will never be ready to lead an NFL team.

 

[gimmesix]

QB's are judged by how they play in elimination games that's why Romo's have been scrutinized. I'm defending Weeden vs an undrafted rookie free agent developmental QB who's never taken a regular season snap. If you're going to start getting nasty this discussion will end and so will any future discussions. It's obvious you're becoming frustrated so move on.

Not becoming frustrated, just pointing out the fact that someone here undervalues Romo and overvalues Weeden. I won't say who that is, but his initials are KJJ.

 

[gimmesix]

You say one thing and then another. Throughout this entire argument you been saying you want to go with Vaughan to give him some experience and see what he's got while the Cowboys are in playoff contention. No team in the league would play an undrafted rookie developmental project at QB while still in playoff contention when they have an experienced backup QB. You then turned around and said your only contention is if the Cowboys are out of playoff contention they should play Vaughan which I agree with. Try making up your mind! I agree the Cowboys will be out of the playoffs without Romo but a QB who's had 20 plus NFL starts does give the Cowboys at least a chance to stay afloat while an undrafted rookie free agent developmental QB who struggle with their reads and accuracy in the final preseason game vs bubble players doesn't. Common sense should tell you that.

When have I ever said I want to see what Vaughan's got while the Cowboys are in playoff contention? My premise is that if Romo's out, Weeden isn't taking us anywhere, so I'd rather see Vaughan since the Cowboys wouldn't be in playoff contention anymore. Vaughan over Weeden is the only thing this is about for me.

You're the one who apparently believes Weeden can keep us afloat when his 5-21 record says he'd sink us so fast it would be a worse disaster than the Titanic. Common sense should tell you that.

 

[gimmesix]

The Cowboys had a 10-0 lead vs AZ and you consider that a game that went consistently bad? The Cowboys were still in that game into the 4th quarter. According to my criteria the Cowboys would have to be getting blown out with no opportunity to win in the 4th quarter before Vaughan would ever see the field. I'm in no way supporting your argument but you've supported mine by saying the Cowboys are going with Weeden due to his experience. If you're going to start putting spins on my comments this discussion will never end. You and I aren't even reading from the same book.

It was pretty obvious after one half that Dallas wasn't going to win with Weeden. I wouldn't have replaced him until Arizona went up 21-10. That was a blowout in that game since the offense had only generated three points.

 

[KJJ]

I would have cut Weeden after the preseason because he showed he will never be ready to lead an NFL team.

You've repeated that at least a dozen times. Anything to keep this argument going.

 

[KJJ]

When have I ever said I want to see what Vaughan's got while the Cowboys are in playoff contention?

You've been saying that this entire argument. You've been saying from the time we started this debate you want to put Vaughan in and see what he can do while the Cowboys are in contention. Being 6-3 has the Cowboys in contention whether you want to admit it or not. Romo being out doesn't automatically remove the Cowboys from contention it takes losses to do that. With Romo out an extended period it's not likely the Cowboys will make the playoffs but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility. You don't give up on the season with 7 games left because your starting QB is out.

 

[KJJ]

Not becoming frustrated, just pointing out the fact that someone here undervalues Romo and overvalues Weeden. I won't say who that is, but his initials are KJJ.

Like I said don't try and steer this discussion towards Romo. You attempted the same thing about a year ago in another discussion between us that you were becoming frustrated with. This is just an attempt to get this thread off track and attract the flame throwers. You obviously aren't getting any backing with this discussion other than from one poster so why not attempt to lure in a few of the bad apples by changing the subject towards Romo...NOT HAPPENING!

This discussion is staying on Weeden and Vaughan or it will be over as will any future discussions between us. I get the feeling you enjoy debating me and if so keep it civil because once I move on from someone it's for good. I've had no choice the past few months but to pull the plug on a few because it leads to trouble.

 

[KJJ]

It was pretty obvious after one half that Dallas wasn't going to win with Weeden. I wouldn't have replaced him until Arizona went up 21-10. That was a blowout in that game since the offense had only generated three points.

I've been called negative by a few here but man you must not have any faith in anything if you gave up on that game at the half. The Cowboys were only down by 4 points after 3 quarters. You call a 21-10 score a "blowout?" LOL Any NFL team could make up that difference in no time regardless of their QB situation. Another turnover and score and the Cowboys would have been right back in the game in position to win with a TD.

 

[gimmesix]

You've been saying that this entire argument. You've been saying from the time we started this debate you want to put Vaughan in and see what he caIf n do while the Cowboys are in contention. Being 6-3 has the Cowboys in contention whether you want to admit it or not. Romo being out doesn't automatically remove the Cowboys from contention it takes losses to do that. With Romo out an extended period it's not likely the Cowboys will make the playoffs but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility. You don't give up on the season with 7 games left because your starting QB is out.

You do if Weeden is your backup. My contention is we have just as much a shot of making the playoffs with Vaughan as QB as Weeden. Your contention is that's not true despite the fact that Weeden has proven that he is not an NFL-caliber QB.

Dallas' record would be irrelevant if Romo was out. The only thing Dallas would be contending for is to see how fast it can go from the top to the bottom. With Weeden, it might take a game or two more to get there than it would with Vaughan.

 

[gimmesix]

You've repeated that at least a dozen times. Anything to keep this argument going.

If you don't like the argument I'm making, you don't have to listen to it.

 

[gimmesix]

You've been saying that this entire argument. You've been saying from the time we started this debate you want to put Vaughan in and see what he can do while the Cowboys are in contention. Being 6-3 has the Cowboys in contention whether you want to admit it or not. Romo being out doesn't automatically remove the Cowboys from contention it takes losses to do that. With Romo out an extended period it's not likely the Cowboys will make the playoffs but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility. You don't give up on the season with 7 games left because your starting QB is out.

Giving up is relative. If you have a horse that is lame, would you rather shoot it now or shoot it later hoping that somehow it miraculously recovers?

You seem to hang on to the fact that even with Romo being out Dallas would still be in contention without acknowledging the fact that with Weeden at QB, the Cowboys would stand no chance of making the playoffs. That's why I say you're delusional.

It's not delusional to think that a rookie QB isn't going to lead us to the playoffs, but it's certainly delusional to think Weeden is. I'd rather give the rookie a chance to possibly play beyond expectations than to see a QB who has proven he is what he is live up to expectations.

 

[gimmesix]

I've been called negative by a few here but man you must not have any faith in anything if you gave up on that game at the half. The Cowboys were only down by 4 points after 3 quarters. You call a 21-10 score a "blowout?" LOL Any NFL team could make up that difference in no time regardless of their QB situation. Another turnover and score and the Cowboys would have been right back in the game in position to win with a TD.

No matter who was at QB.

Did you see anything in Weeden in that game that gave you hope that he could lead the team to victory? I didn't give up on the game at halftime; I gave up on Weeden being able to provide what's necessary to win the game, which proved to be true. As I said, I would have removed him at 21-10 because it was obvious that if Dallas did anything to win it would be despite of him not because of him.

 

[gimmesix]

Like I said don't try and steer this discussion towards Romo. You attempted the same thing about a year ago in another discussion between us that you were becoming frustrated with. This is just an attempt to get this thread off track and attract the flame throwers. You obviously aren't getting any backing with this discussion other than from one poster so why not attempt to lure in a few of the bad apples by changing the subject towards Romo...NOT HAPPENING!

This discussion is staying on Weeden and Vaughan or it will be over as will any future discussions between us. I get the feeling you enjoy debating me and if so keep it civil because once I move on from someone it's for good. I've had no choice the past few months but to pull the plug on a few because it leads to trouble.

You brought up that elimination game junk not me. I just brought up the fact that you use that crap to disparage Romo, then come to the defense of a QB who can't even carry his jock strap, which seems kind of funny to me.

I know you're not saying Weeden is better than Romo, but you do seem to think we could possibly win with Weeden when the real evidence, not that elimination game fluff, says no way.