What would have a healthy Romo done in 2016?

nothing because our defense once again folded against Rogers which is something that had already happen previously to a Romo led team.

A healthy Romo would have gotten hurt..

MountaineerCowboy said:

I wouldn't have been upset either way. It's one of the rare situations where, to me, whatever decision you make is okay to me.

You go with the veteran Romo, because of the experience and skill, but risk it messing up the flow of everything when were were rolling.

Or you stick with Dak, because everything seems to be working, but at the end of the day he's just a rookie and his numbers are basically below average in everything. Yeah, his numbers are great for a rookie QB, but compared to the rest of the NFL QBs he's average or below in a lot of important categories (TDs, yards, YPG).

Looking back they probably made the wrong decision. Because Dak was nothing but a bus driver, and if Zeke was slowed down we would need great QB play to keep advancing in the playoffs. Dak through 6 seasons has shown that he can't be that type of QB. That win streak was the worst thing that could've happened. Because had we lost a few games here and there the decision to go back to Romo would have been easier. I can't be THAT upset with it though, because Romo never done anything either and maybe a breath of fresh air was needed, but now we know Dak is Dak and isn't anything special.

Click to expand...

I hear everything you are saying .... but zero is still zero. Rookie QB win % in the playoffs is like .355. Every coach should have been able to look at the team and understand they were just physically better than most NFL teams BUT that wouldn't be the case in the playoffs. It should have been an easy decision for folks who supposedly understand %'s. There is no way a real coach like BB, JJ would have planned on playing rookie ball in the playoffs.

RomoIsGod said:

Had Romo never gotten hurt in 2016, what would have the Cowboys done in 2016? A healthy Romo all season.

Click to expand...

He was healthy enough for rhe Playoffs

McKDaddy said:

I hear everything you are saying .... but zero is still zero. Rookie QB win % in the playoffs is like .355. Every coach should have been able to look at the team and understand they were just physically better than most NFL teams BUT that wouldn't be the case in the playoffs. It should have been an easy decision for folks who supposedly understand %'s. There is no way a real coach like BB, JJ would have planned on playing rookie ball in the playoffs.

Click to expand...

No true at all this place would have melted down removing a player lie Dak who helped go on 11 game win streak or whatever it was go into the playoffs and then get removed? the momentum had to stay the course. I am a huge Romo fan and would have loved to see him get back and say play the last two games and of he was just super on point maybe he gets the nod but no way the media and most of the fan base would have allowed that. Place would have melted down/ we have seen rookies lie Wilson play into a sb and others at younger ages then normal.

the defense as usual spit the bit once again against Rogers..that was the issue not dak, dak and zeke played great in that game

blueblood70 said:

Place would have melted down/ we have seen rookies lie Wilson play into a sb

Click to expand...

Wilson did not reach the SB as a rookie. No rookie QB ever has.

As a coach, I don't worry about what the public thinks. I am paid to know football & put my team in the best position to win. Choosing to ride a rookie is choosing to lose before you play the game. Also, I have always contended that you didn't have to make a one or the other decision. You could have had packages for both QB's.

It goes both ways, if you win some playoff games this place would have melted down in a good way.

MountaineerCowboy said:

I don't know if we win the Super Bowl, but we would've at least beat Green Bay.

If I remember correctly wasn't Green Bay missing their 2 starting CBs that game?

Romo would have known how to take advantage of that and wouldn't have waited until we're already down 28-13 going into the 4th quarter to do anything.

Dak was being Dak all the way back in year 1. Do nothing for 3 quarters, go down by a few TDs, and then put up empty stats in a losing effort to bring the game closer and give his fangirls something to brag about.

Click to expand...

Yeah Im sure other rookie quarterbacks could have led their teams as far as Dak led the Cowboys that year because all rookies come out and have the same success that Dak had. Ok, no they don't.

I agree that Romo probably would have taken advantage of certain mismatches better than a rookie quarterback, but wouldn't that have been expected of a seasoned veteran?? Shouldn't a seasoned veteran play better than a rookie???

Oh wait... that rookie Dak took the veteran Romo's job. We should put up a chart showing which quarterback had a better rookie season, Dak or Romo. Anybody know Romo's rookie year numbers? Im just curious....

1 and out in the payoffs. That's what

McKDaddy said:

Wilson did not reach the SB as a rookie. No rookie QB ever has.

As a coach, I don't worry about what the public thinks. I am paid to know football & put my team in the best position to win. Choosing to ride a rookie is choosing to lose before you play the game. Also, I have always contended that you didn't have to make a one or the other decision. You could have had packages for both QB's.

It goes both ways, if you win some playoff games this place would have melted down in a good way.

Click to expand...

doesnt matter the run Dak was on and zeke was rolling great OL i mean why make the change there's first time for everything. the reason we lost is because every time Dak brought us back the defense would give the lead right back until 1:13 and again could not stop AR.


wasnt that the game they made 50 yard FG once AR got them in range and a penalty was called and that kicker made that one as well?

baltcowboy said:

Lose to Aaron Rodgers just like the Cowboys did in the 2016 playoffs.

Click to expand...

yep ... just like we did vs Aaron Rodgers in 2014 .. .the no Dez TD catch game

- Our Rod Marinelli led defense just would've never had an answer for Aaron Rodgers Happened in 2016, just as it did. in 2014,
A-Rodgers was playing on one leg per injury and we still could not get near him or disrupt him in 2014 at GB.

- Zeke got his 100+ rushing yrds in 2016 playoffs vs GB.. and it still did not matter.

- Marinelli and his dumb defensive coaches had Byron Jones as a FS (whose always lost in zone coverage) anyway- gave up the huge play to TE Jared Cook en route to game winning FG.

- As far as Romo, probably bitter sweet, he wouldve pass for 300+ yrds but also throw 2 or 3 INTs ..but overall as with our playoff games- (ala GB, Rams, Niners)
its' always....always comes down to a failing Defensive unit.

KJJ said:

Don’t know where you’ve been but Aaron Rodgers has the Cowboys number in the playoffs. He beat them on one leg in the playoffs in 2014.

Click to expand...

With a healthy Romo at QB.

Flamma said:

I don't think that Cowboys team gets past Atlanta no matter who was at QB. Atlanta would have put up 40+ points against that crap defense.

Click to expand...

Falcons put up 44 on the Packers; held Green scoreless almost halfway into the 3rd qtr...0 - 31.

Well..likely this topic will surface again from time to time in the future (,certainly if the Cowboys miss \ don't go far in the playoffs following the 2022 regular season).

RomoIsGod said:

Had Romo never gotten hurt in 2016, what would have the Cowboys done in 2016? A healthy Romo all season.

Click to expand...

Entering August 2016 training camp, the quarterback depth chart was:

1. Tony Romo
2. Kellen Moore
3. Dak Prescott

Moore was the first backup quarterback. He sustained a broken ankle on Tuesday, August 2. Moore's injury was season ending.

Romo was the starting quarterback.quarterback. He suffered a broken broken bone in his back in the Thursday, August 25 preseason Seattle game. His initial prognosis was a projected mid-season return to active status.

Prescott was the second backup quarterback. He performed exceptionally well during Romo's absence, helping lead the team to a 7-1 record (best in the NFC).

Per The Washington Post on Wednesday, November 9, Romo had already been medically cleared to return to the active roster.

In my opinion, a 'What If?' does not require speculating what Romo would have done during the entire 2016 season since he was injured and unable to play for half of the regular season in reality. I believe a more relevant question would be, "What would the Dallas Cowboys have done after mid-season if the starting quarterback had been re-inserted into the offense?"

It will remain a relevant question (not just for the franchise but for the entire league) until-and-when a rookie quarterback, graced with a good team, gains the opportunity to help lead his team to a Super Bowl appearance and/or victory. Until that day happens, no rookie quarterback will have ever played for and/or help win a Lombardi Trophy in the over half-century era of the National Football League's Super Bowl. That was true before 2016. That was true during 2016. That has been true since 2016.

Motorola said:

With a healthy Romo at QB.

Click to expand...

Right, with a healthy Romo who played arguably his best playoff game ever with zero turnovers and DeMarco Murray put up 123 rushing yards. We still couldn’t beat Aaron Rodgers who was limping around on one leg. Our defense did us in that day and it did us in again in 2016 against Rodgers.

DallasEast said:

In my opinion, a 'What If?' does not require speculating what Romo would have done during the entire 2016 season since he was injured and unable to play for half of the regular season in reality. I believe a more relevant question would be, "What would the Dallas Cowboys have done after mid-season if the starting quarterback had been re-inserted into the offense?"

It will remain a relevant question (not just for the franchise but for the entire league) until-and-when a rookie quarterback, graced with a good team, gains the opportunity to help lead his team to a Super Bowl appearance and/or victory. Until that day happens, no rookie quarterback will have ever played for and/or help win a Lombardi Trophy in the over half-century era of the National Football League's Super Bowl. That was true before 2016. That was true during 2016. That has been true since 2016.

Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying what should have been obvious. Discussion was never about Romo playing the full season but rather what if he had been put back in the lineup.

Secondly everyone wants to chime in about analytics & smart football when discussing a razor thin % difference like whether to go for it in a certain situation but when you have an absolute value of zero they suddenly ignore the numbers. There are reasons it has never been done. Ignoring them isn't logical decision making, its emotional decision making.

RomoIsGod said:

Had Romo never gotten hurt in 2016, what would have the Cowboys done in 2016? A healthy Romo all season.

Click to expand...

I prefer the question of "What if Romo had been the Patriots QB instead of Brady. How many Super Bowls would Romo have won?"


Answer: Probably not 6 like Brady, but definitely would have won some.

McKDaddy said:

Secondly everyone wants to chime in about analytics & smart football when discussing a razor thin % difference like whether to go for it in a certain situation but when you have an absolute value of zero they suddenly ignore the numbers. There are reasons it has never been done. Ignoring them isn't logical decision making, its emotional decision making.

Click to expand...

That was especially true that season. The euphoria created by the winning streak was as evident with Jerry Jones and Jason Garrett as it was with a significant portion of the team's fanbase. The 'don't disturb team chemistry' mantra was exceedingly strong. To be perfectly frank, it was freaking thick. It may not be incorrect describing emotions felt from the front office on down, equally, as fanatical.

I have been wondering for a long time whether the team could have still been situated in good position of obtaining an eventual playoff seed after suffering two or three additional losses by the mid-season mark. Would that scenario have injected a more cautionary, analytical sense of evaluation into Jones and Garrett's mindsets? There is zero way of knowing for certain.

However, it is... discouraging... for actual decision-makers to not thoroughly think things through. They had options. Inserting Romo back into the starting line would not have negated Prescott's opportunity to replace Romo again if another injury had occurred or Romo had underperformed during a game in the second half of the regular season or even during the playoff game itself. Those are expanded coaching decisions that a front office should place its trust in its head coach to enact whenever necessary. Did not happen that season though. On average, true in-season Super Bowl runs are fleeting even for the most successful franchises. Bungling those rare opportunities with narrow-minded thinking is an utter waste.

Oh well. Que sera sera.

This was an option???? who screwed this up why in the world would we have a broken Romo when we could've had a healthy one??? someone needs to be fired for this.

MountaineerCowboy said:

I don't know if we win the Super Bowl, but we would've at least beat Green Bay.

If I remember correctly wasn't Green Bay missing their 2 starting CBs that game?

Romo would have known how to take advantage of that and wouldn't have waited until we're already down 28-13 going into the 4th quarter to do anything.

Dak was being Dak all the way back in year 1. Do nothing for 3 quarters, go down by a few TDs, and then put up empty stats in a losing effort to bring the game closer and give his fangirls something to brag about.

Click to expand...

It took an incredible play with a few missed holding calls to kick the game winner. Can’t forget about that.