If any of this were even remotely true then what could have been the rational for Jones and Garrett to keep Romo as the backup QB? I mean if Dak got hurt wouldn't they have had to put Romo in the game, thus putting him in a position to hurt his back which would result in the "probable paralysis" you talk about....LOL.
Good question. It is a question best posed only to those who consistently claim:
a) Jones and Garrett 'knew' Romo was a hit away from permanent paralysis and
b) Romo should have embraced the backup role despite wanting to be the starter again
It's tricky. Not everyone has taken that particular stance involving those two specific criteria. Some have. Others have argued point A and not point B. Still others have argued point B without clarifying whether they believed point A was even valid. More have differing variations on the pre-destined severed spine argument.
My post was not so much about who--namely anyone outside the front office inner circle--thought what. It was more about simply questioning why the decision makers, Jones and Garrett, made the determination, allegedly, to not play Romo, in order to 'save him from being paralyzed', yet followed with a 180 degree reversal from the earlier decision by permitting Romo an opportunity of experiencing a swan song possession despite the unquestionable 'ever present' life debilitating danger.
The two decisions were self-conflicting if injury was the
key element of their decision making process. The question is why were the opposing decisions made?
Logic suggests the separate decisions corroborate with each other based on another factor that had little or nothing to do with the neverending self-perpetuating Ironside fallacy. An alternative and logical conclusion is that a general manager and head coach witnessed their franchise quarterback get injured, saw the promise in a drafted fourth round quarterback, watched that fourth round quarterback's promise blossom into a historic defining reality, and gambled that benching the backup quarterback in favor of the previous starting quarterback would ruin all chance of reaching and/or winning Super Bowl LI...
...despite knowing the odds of any rookie quarterback leading any team to any championship game or winning any championship in the
National Football League are practically zero.
My own opinion remains unchanged. Jones found his new franchise quarterback. He no longer needed his old franchise quarterback. And, in his mind, discarded old for new, probably as early as mid-October 2016. Garrett was likely even more simple. His offense continued running well with the new quarterback. He has always demonstrated a one-track coaching mindset. Romo would not change his 'If it ain't broke don't fix it' way of thinking.