Looking back: Was it a mistake not to go back to Romo

jnday · Jun 17, 2020

fairviewfarmer said:
Romo was one hit from being on the IR again. ....or worse.....

He was definitely at the end of his career, but he was also a much better QB than Dak during that time. If a Romo would have started, it would have been the best chance of winning a Super Bowl in the last couple of decades.

Ranched · Jun 17, 2020

fairviewfarmer said:
Romo was one hit from being on the IR again. ....or worse.....

Thanks to those great Olines. The man was always scrambling for his life.

Bobhaze · Jun 17, 2020

buybuydandavis said:
The problem with Romo was durability. He played the best ball of his career in 2014. MVP level play. He looked very sharp in the one drive they allowed him. Hadn't played for months, and marched down the field for a TD. He was *already* paid for. Put him back in. If he breaks, you put Dak back in and you're back where you started.

This way we get two chances for great QB play. Dak wasn't going anywhere. If Romo doesn't still have it, move to Dak the next year, like we did. If Romo still has it, now you've got two franchise QBs. A good problem to have.

Dumping Romo let Garrett stick around longer. Moving on from Garrett (and lots of things) when Romo was done was an obvious move. By sticking with Dak, Garrett got a rationale to not rock the boat on the success with Dak.

The last year Tony Romo’s body was good enough to play consistently was 2014. That collarbone injury in 2015 happened 2 games into the season. After that injury and his continuing back problems, Romo never again played 2 consecutive games without another serious injury.

In his second game back from injury in 2015, Romo hurt his shoulder again and was done. In the only time he played in the 2016 preseason, Romo broke a bone in his back just a few plays into the first possession of the 1st qtr and was once again out for a long time.

The 20/20 hindsight seems to assume that Tony Romo would somehow hold up to the ordinary NFL hits that in 2015 and 2016 were putting him on the DL. Meanwhile, Dak was the QB while the Cowboys went on their longest winning streak in team history and secured the #1 seed in the playoffs. I just have to disagree with the idea that Tony Romo would have carried this team farther in 2016 if given the chance. The evidence seems clear, he was a physically broken player by then.

Super_Kazuya · Jun 17, 2020

Bobhaze said:
The last year Tony Romo’s body was good enough to play consistently was 2014. That collarbone injury in 2015 happened 2 games into the season. After that injury and his continuing back problems, Romo never again played 2 consecutive games without another serious injury.

In his second game back from injury in 2015, Romo hurt his shoulder again and was done. In the only time he played in the 2016 preseason, Romo broke a bone in his back just a few plays into the first possession of the 1st qtr and was once again out for a long time.

The 20/20 hindsight seems to assume that Tony Romo would somehow hold up to the ordinary NFL hits that in 2015 and 2016 were putting him on the DL. Meanwhile, Dak was the QB while the Cowboys went on their longest winning streak in team history and secured the #1 seed in the playoffs. I just have to disagree with the idea that Tony Romo would have carried this team farther in 2016 if given the chance. The evidence seems clear, he was a physically broken player by then.

While I am bored to death of the subject of the thread, I do miss reading the brain dead takes from the Dak slobbering quack doctors on here. Never gets old. Apparently Romo had osteoporosis or something. In his 30s. lol

DanA · Jun 17, 2020

Bobhaze said:
The last year Tony Romo’s body was good enough to play consistently was 2014. That collarbone injury in 2015 happened 2 games into the season. After that injury and his continuing back problems, Romo never again played 2 consecutive games without another serious injury.

In his second game back from injury in 2015, Romo hurt his shoulder again and was done. In the only time he played in the 2016 preseason, Romo broke a bone in his back just a few plays into the first possession of the 1st qtr and was once again out for a long time.

The 20/20 hindsight seems to assume that Tony Romo would somehow hold up to the ordinary NFL hits that in 2015 and 2016 were putting him on the DL. Meanwhile, Dak was the QB while the Cowboys went on their longest winning streak in team history and secured the #1 seed in the playoffs. I just have to disagree with the idea that Tony Romo would have carried this team farther in 2016 if given the chance. The evidence seems clear, he was a physically broken player by then.

I don't disagree with any of that. I still would have given him the chance to finish his career in the playoffs. There's a good chance he wouldn't have made it through the playoffs but I never rated Garrett and always felt like Romo was more willing to be a coach on the field an put us in a winning position.

BIGDen · Jun 17, 2020

glimmerman said:
I have wondered about it. He had his swan song against the egirls with that last drive. That was a cruel move by JG. He made that TD look easy. Got Romo’s hopes up and next thing you know he is making that speech with tears in his eyes.

I still wonder how much of that was JJ’s idea. Was gonna be his decision. Only thing I heard is there was some bitter blood between Romo and JG. He wouldn’t allow Romo to compete for his job because he would have beaten Dak out. He was more in tune with the receivers. But maybe not.

From what I recall, it was Garrett, Linehan, and S. Jones that were on board with keeping the rookie (who was exposed on 3rd & long repeatedly that year) out there over the All-Pro. Jerry wanted Romo. Jerry was right. Personally, I think Garrett and Linehan liked the fact that Dak wouldn't change their plays. Zeke was dominant and Dak could run if a play didn't work. They were winning, so "why change it?" The problem was, when we played the Giants and Vikings, Dak's rookie warts were exposed - he was helpless on 3rd and long. Romo was the best passer in the NFL in in last season prior to injury ('14). I would love to have seen him with Zeke. It would've been like taking candy from a baby with that offense. Garrett wasted some really talented rosters. Ironically, if Romo wasn't so good at making Garrett look competent over the years, Garrett probably wouldn't have still been around to screw Romo.

Aviano90 · Jun 17, 2020

We were the number 1 seed with home field advantage in the playoffs and would have played Green Bay regardless of whether or not Romo came back when he was healthy.

So this debate only boils down to whether or not we would have won the GB game with Romo playing QB instead of Dak. Dak played a very good game, threw for over 300 yards, 3 TDs, had over a 100 QB rating and we scored on 6 of our 9 possessions. He threw an interception though.

The assumption is Romo is the better QB so then he MOST DEFINITELY would have had a better game. Perhaps he would have but I know of 2 instances in the same game where the offense played better in a game with Brandon Weeden than we did with Tony Romo. Those games were against Washington in 2014 when Romo missed some time in the game and Weeden came in for 2 series. We scored 7 points with Romo and 10 with Weeden. Romo replaced Weeden and our offense sputtered again while we lost in OT. The second time was against Philly in week 2 of 2015. Our offense scored 6 points in 3 quarters with Romo playing. Weeden played the 4th quarter and threw a TD pass. So the better QB doesn't always play better.

There is also the assumption Romo was just going to light up the GB secondary because of injury. He had a chance to light up the Giants banged up secondary in the playoffs in 2007. We had torched the Giants for 45 points in game 1 and 31 points in game 2. We scored 17 points on our first 4 possessions so we were well on our way to doing the same thing. Then we were held scoreless on the last 4 possessions of the game even though we had open receivers because the Giants secondary was pretty terrible due to injuries.

There is also the assumption that there is no way Romo could fail at the end of the game. We were carving GB up in 2013 all game until the end when Romo threw 2 interceptions on back to back drives. We were carving up Denver in 2013 when Romo threw an interception in the final 2 minutes of a tie game when all we needed was a FG to win. We were carving up Detroit in 2011 when Romo threw a couple of pick sixes and we lost the game. Even when we are cruising against a team, Romo still possessed the ability to make mistakes. We can't just assume he plays mistakes free football that day because he's the better QB.

I bring up those examples and surely Romo diehard fans will rush in to defend him and point out things like pressure, dropped passes, and the defense, etc. But they just can't bring themselves to look at the GB game in 2016 and extend the same courtesy to Dak. They just refuse to do it. I just don't understand the obsession with harping over a "what if" scenario in which we replace one of the very best performers we had on the field that day with another player and assuming that was the key factor in the outcome of our season ending loss. Dak didn't play perfect, but neither would Romo have.

Bobhaze · Jun 17, 2020

Super_Kazuya said:
While I am bored to death of the subject of the thread, I do miss reading the brain dead takes from the Dak slobbering quack doctors on here. Never gets old. Apparently Romo had osteoporosis or something. In his 30s. lol

Well he did miss over 30 games the last 5 years of his career. Look I’m not slobbering over Dak. I’m just offering some things to think about. None of us know if Romo would have been able to play well in 2016. We do know he was having major injury problems at that point in his career. That’s just the truth.

Cowboysfan917 · Jun 17, 2020

I always thought it was a mistake. You put your best players on the field. Romo was the best QB on the team. He should’ve been eased back in for a playoff run.
He should’ve come back in on a Thursday game(week after thanksgiving I believe they had another Thursday game) so he would’ve had 10 days rest afterwards.
It was a mistake and a slap in the face to a franchise player by the powers that were.
No telling what he could’ve done with that run game.

It also would’ve allowed Dak to sit and watch probably another year or two. I’m a big believer in QBs riding the pine and learning to be pros. I feel you have fewer growing pains that way usually.

Cowboysfan917 · Jun 17, 2020

Aviano90 said:
We were the number 1 seed with home field advantage in the playoffs and would have played Green Bay regardless of whether or not Romo came back when he was healthy.

So this debate only boils down to whether or not we would have won the GB game with Romo playing QB instead of Dak. Dak played a very good game, threw for over 300 yards, 3 TDs, had over a 100 QB rating and we scored on 6 of our 9 possessions. He threw an interception though.

The assumption is Romo is the better QB so then he MOST DEFINITELY would have had a better game. Perhaps he would have but I know of 2 instances in the same game where the offense played better in a game with Brandon Weeden than we did with Tony Romo. Those games were against Washington in 2014 when Romo missed some time in the game and Weeden came in for 2 series. We scored 7 points with Romo and 10 with Weeden. Romo replaced Weeden and our offense sputtered again while we lost in OT. The second time was against Philly in week 2 of 2015. Our offense scored 6 points in 3 quarters with Romo playing. Weeden played the 4th quarter and threw a TD pass. So the better QB doesn't always play better.

There is also the assumption Romo was just going to light up the GB secondary because of injury. He had a chance to light up the Giants banged up secondary in the playoffs in 2007. We had torched the Giants for 45 points in game 1 and 31 points in game 2. We scored 17 points on our first 4 possessions so we were well on our way to doing the same thing. Then we were held scoreless on the last 4 possessions of the game even though we had open receivers because the Giants secondary was pretty terrible due to injuries.

There is also the assumption that there is no way Romo could fail at the end of the game. We were carving GB up in 2013 all game until the end when Romo threw 2 interceptions on back to back drives. We were carving up Denver in 2013 when Romo threw an interception in the final 2 minutes of a tie game when all we needed was a FG to win. We were carving up Detroit in 2011 when Romo threw a couple of pick sixes and we lost the game. Even when we are cruising against a team, Romo still possessed the ability to make mistakes. We can't just assume he plays mistakes free football that day because he's the better QB.

I bring up those examples and surely Romo diehard fans will rush in to defend him and point out things like pressure, dropped passes, and the defense, etc. But they just can't bring themselves to look at the GB game in 2016 and extend the same courtesy to Dak. They just refuse to do it. I just don't understand the obsession with harping over a "what if" scenario in which we replace one of the very best performers we had on the field that day with another player and assuming that was the key factor in the outcome of our season ending loss. Dak didn't play perfect, but neither would Romo have.

This argument is flawed for multiple reasons:

1.) big difference between a player being inserted into a game when the other team did not prepare for him and a player being the starter.

2.) you treat Romo as if he was a robot who never improved or learned in his career, citing examples in other seasons. He clearly grew as a player and a QB. That was heavily evidenced by his 2014 season. Also his supporting cast in 2016 would’ve been his best since his first full year starting in 2007 when a player is going to make a lot of mistakes.

Super_Kazuya · Jun 17, 2020

Bobhaze said:
Well he did miss over 30 games the last 5 years of his career. Look I’m not slobbering over Dak. I’m just offering some things to think about. None of us know if Romo would have been able to play well in 2016. We do know he was having major injury problems at that point in his career. That’s just the truth.

Broken bones aren’t major injury problems. Aaron Rodgers has also broken his collarbone twice, and has managed to get through the last two seasons fine... despite taking more sacks over the last two years than Romo ever did. That’s because broken bones... heal. Maybe you should actually educate yourself on Tony’s last injury... he broke a small bone that didn’t even immediately take him out of the game, and he was able to throw during his rehab. It just wasn’t safe to play until it healed. You saying Romo was a “physically broken” player is completely stupid.

Aviano90 · Jun 17, 2020

Cowboysfan917 said:
This argument is flawed for multiple reasons:

1.) big difference between a player being inserted into a game when the other team did not prepare for him and a player being the starter.

2.) you treat Romo as if he was a robot who never improved or learned in his career, citing examples in other seasons. He clearly grew as a player and a QB. That was heavily evidenced by his 2014 season. Also his supporting cast in 2016 would’ve been his best since his first full year starting in 2007 when a player is going to make a lot of mistakes.

It's only flawed because it doesn't say that we would have won the GB game with Romo instead of Dak.

aria · Jun 17, 2020

I’m just copied and pasted this from another thread I just responded to since it may be more relevant here and the more people that see this reminder the better.

The Romo love is ridiculous, he had his chances and blew it. Was it JG’s fault that caused him to throw the INT that sealed their fate against the Giants in the playoffs?

Was it JG’s fault that caused him to do something as simple as catching a snap and holding the ball for FG against Seattle that would have given us the win? Even Parcells saw the writing on the wall after that play and knew he would never be able to win with that loser so he retired. Ya get that? Romo forced Parcells into retirement!

Was it JG that caused Romo to throw an INT and LOSE not one, but two, fumbles against the Vikings in the playoffs?

Off the top of my head that’s THREE playoff games that Romo is largely or directly responsible for losing. Some of you need a wake up call. If that was Dak he would be crucified, as Romo was, but some of you like to ignore facts and history.

Bobhaze · Jun 17, 2020

Super_Kazuya said:
Broken bones aren’t major injury problems. Aaron Rodgers has also broken his collarbone twice, and has managed to get through the last two seasons fine... despite taking more sacks over the last two years than Romo ever did. That’s because broken bones... heal. Maybe you should actually educate yourself on Tony’s last injury... he broke a small bone that didn’t even immediately take him out of the game, and he was able to throw during his rehab. It just wasn’t safe to play until it healed. You saying Romo was a “physically broken” player is completely stupid.

When a guy can’t play because of injury, that’s a problem. Romo missed 36 games to injury since becoming the starter in 2006. He was a pretty durable QB until 2010. But he missed 23 games in his last 4 seasons because he physically could not play.

I’m not dissing Romo for that. I respect Tony Romo very much. He was a tough cookie. But it’s pretty clear he could not hold up to NFL contact consistently the last 2 years.

And we can agree to disagree without the insults.

BIGDen · Jun 17, 2020

Swagger said:
I largely agree re 2014 and the reality is that it was on Dez Bryant. I love me some Dez so I don't bang on about it but he knew the rules or should have known the rules at the time. He had control of the ball, he just needed to land normally in play to chew up some clock rather than focus on trying to score a TD! Yet people blame Romo for not throwing the ball to Beasley having slowed down the play to super slow mo and seen him open for a split second. Football doesn't work like that and when watched in real time the throw to Beasley just wasn't on. Romo would have had to loop the ball to him by which time Beasley would have got crushed by a defender. It's questionable if he even makes the first down and even more unlikely that he holds onto the ball. Yet some people blame Romo for Dez dropping the ball! Just shows how much people hate him.

I don't blame the zebras - the rule was the problem which has subsequently been changed and rightly so.

Blaming officials and decisions is a loser mentality. I remember the Lions blaming the play where the zebras picked up a flag in the 2014 play off game. They conveniently do not mention the countless incorrect decisions against the Cowboys in that game which were far more than against the Lions and officially documented after the game. Best team won on the day with a fantastic comeback. Loser mentality blaming officials.

The way the rule was written, at the time, it was undeniably a catch. He reached for the end zone which was considered a football move. That made it a catch. There absolutely was NOT enough evidence for Blandino to OVERTURN what was (correctly) ruled a catch on the field. Having said that, if Murray doesn't fumble or Hannah just falls on a fumble that was in his lap, we probably aren't even talking about that nightmare play (which was an incredibly clutch playoff pass by Romo for the record). Crazy thing is that Romo was criticized for coming up small in the playoffs, yet he had an 4:1 TD to INT ratio in the postseason. He also threw game-winning passes to Crayton vs NY which Crayton screwed up (dropped one then pulled up on a GREAT late game TD pass). He actually threw 2 game-winning TD passes to T. Williams vs Detroit. Williams dropped the first one and Romo had to throw a SECOND one for it to count. Then the Dez play. All postseason. The NY and GB clutch passes completely change his postseason story. Unfortunately, he didn't have dominant postseason defenses like Eli or Ben - or helmet catches and calls in HIS favor. Between that crap and his injuries, bad luck was the only thing preventing Romo from being considered an all-time great. I think Ben had like 6 top 10 defenses and two #1 D's in his first 10 years! Could you imagine if Romo had that? Give Romo 2 postseasons where the defense gives up 15 PPG like sheli had. I'll never forgive Jones and Garrett for wasting Romo's career.

MarcusRock · Jun 17, 2020

BIGDen said:
The way the rule was written, at the time, it was undeniably a catch. He reached for the end zone which was considered a football move. That made it a catch. There absolutely was NOT enough evidence for Blandino to OVERTURN what was (correctly) ruled a catch on the field. Having said that, if Murray doesn't fumble or Hannah just falls on a fumble that was in his lap, we probably aren't even talking about that nightmare play (which was an incredibly clutch playoff pass by Romo for the record). Crazy thing is that Romo was criticized for coming up small in the playoffs, yet he had an 4:1 TD to INT ratio in the postseason. He also threw game-winning passes to Crayton vs NY which Crayton screwed up (dropped one then pulled up on a GREAT late game TD pass). He actually threw 2 game-winning TD passes to T. Williams vs Detroit. Williams dropped the first one and Romo had to throw a SECOND one for it to count. Then the Dez play. All postseason. The NY and GB clutch passes completely change his postseason story. Unfortunately, he didn't have dominant postseason defenses like Eli or Ben - or helmet catches and calls in HIS favor. Between that crap and his injuries, bad luck was the only thing preventing Romo from being considered an all-time great. I think Ben had like 6 top 10 defenses and two #1 D's in his first 10 years! Could you imagine if Romo had that? Give Romo 2 postseasons where the defense gives up 15 PPG like sheli had. I'll never forgive Jones and Garrett for wasting Romo's career.

You're wrong about the rule. If you're deemed as going to the ground, those rules apply over everything else and you can't have the ball hit the ground and come out. Happened to Megatron, happened to Dez, happened to Jesse James. Nobody liked the rule for obvious reasons but it was applied consistently while in effect.

cowboygo · Jun 17, 2020

It didn't matter. Romo's salary cap hit was too high for us to win a Super Bowl. Oh wait, is that not how this works?

Super_Kazuya · Jun 17, 2020

Bobhaze said:
When a guy can’t play because of injury, that’s a problem. Romo missed 36 games to injury since becoming the starter in 2006. He was a pretty durable QB until 2010. But he missed 23 games in his last 4 seasons because he physically could not play.

I’m not dissing Romo for that. I respect Tony Romo very much. He was a tough cookie. But it’s pretty clear he could not hold up to NFL contact consistently the last 2 years.

And we can agree to disagree without the insults.

No, you are moving the goal posts. I have no issue with the team moving on because of unreliability... it doesn’t matter if you are missing games because of a stubbed toe, in the end he was unreliable over the last two seasons. You tried to paint him as a “physically broken” player because of random injuries that would have happened to anyone else. Unless you are trying to say he has osteoporosis... which is laughable... there was no reason to expect him to suffer another injury for the same reason there wasn’t any reason to think the same for Rodgers. Stop embarrassing yourself, you’re clueless and can’t even bother to educate yourself.

"Not the same bone, not the same part of bone. Tony Romo’s bone is not weak. This was football trauma." Unlike the transverse injury, however, the lumbar injury is structural. "It’s much different than in 2014. There’s risk it could get worse. No immediate return to play. He can’t take a hit for six weeks." Chao did note, however, that Romo could be throwing in two weeks time as the throwing motion doesn’t adversely affect the L1 vertebra.

"The bad news is he’s out a minimum 6 weeks. The good news is there’s no surgery required. This injury heals well on its own and there should be no long term issues."

"If Tony Romo wants to play, this will not end his career. There is no medical indication for forced retirement."

johneric8 · Jun 17, 2020

J12B said:
I wonder how things would have played out in 2016 if Romo got his job back once he became healthy.

Perhaps he could have taken the team all the way to the Superbowl like he almost did in 2014.

Perhaps Romo could have played one more season and Dak would only have 2018 and 2019 as being a starter for this team. His value would most likely be worth less because 2017 was a down year for Dak.

Perhaps he could've got re-injured and Dak would've stepped back in only further proving Romo's durability issues.

But to this day I still think Garrett and Jones did Romo dirty by not giving him his starting job back.

Jason Garrett.....*shivers*

Dear sir,

Thank you for outing yourself so candidly, along with many others In this thread, for the complete and utter Dak hating trolls they really are.
:facepalm:

Beaker42 · Jun 17, 2020

D

blueblood70 said:
hindsight is nice but you cant go back and start what ifs and yet still have Dak declining in 18/19..maybe his year sitting would have made him more prepared for pressure as 2016 he had no expectations or pressure, now that some has been applied he hasn't handled those situations as well..IE maybe he thought it was all going to be as easy as 16 and is now a bit shell shocked..

I would have liked to see Romo take the ball back and see what he could do but it was the correct choice at the time..

ak really hasn’t been the same since Clayborn made him his personal chew toy, compliments of Spaz Green.

Looking back: Was it a mistake not to go back to Romo

jnday

Well-Known Member

Ranched

"We Are Penn State"

Bobhaze

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member

DanA

Well-Known Member

BIGDen

Dr. Freakasaurus

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!

Bobhaze

Cowboysfan917

Well-Known Member

Cowboysfan917

Well-Known Member

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member

Aviano90

Go Seahawks!!!

aria

Well-Known Member

Bobhaze

BIGDen

Dr. Freakasaurus

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member

cowboygo

Well-Known Member

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member

johneric8

Well-Known Member

Beaker42

Well-Known Member