Was it the right decision?

Supercowboy1986 · Oct 28, 2014

DISCLAIMER:

IF YOURE GOING GO BE AN IDIOT OR TROLL AND WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE ANY FORM OF DISCUSSION DO NOT BOTHER REPLYING. THIS IS A SERIOUS DEBATEABLE TOPIC AND THIS THREAD IS LOOKING FOR SERIOUS THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION.

Ok, now that stage has been set... should we have let romo come back to the game or should of let the "hot hand" aka weeden stay in. The points scored were when weeden was filling in and it appeared we were more productive offense wise for that quarter and a half. I personally, think that if the starter is able to play, he should be put back in the game despite the outcome. Hindsight is indeed 20/20 and we MIGHT of won it if weeden would of stayed in. The 49ers most recently was in a similar situation when Alex smith got hurt and kapernick (despite if you
Think he sucks or not) was the "hot hand" and the HC kept him in the game despite Alex smith returning from injury and went on a hot streak. I am in no way insinuating that weeden is on the same level of kapernick or that he is the savory of our franchise, what am I saying for THIS GAME should we had let weeden finish the game?

StarBoyz83 · Oct 28, 2014

Weeden seemed to have the hot hand but I wouldve put romo back in also.

Oh_Canada · Oct 28, 2014

I would've stayed with Weeden, had Romo not had a history of back troubles I may have let him back in. The team just looked sharper with Weeden though.

theSHOW · Oct 28, 2014

Weeden was playing better than an uninjured Romo. Considering that Tony was hurt and weeden had just led Dallas back the answer was quite obvious to let the game play out with Tony resting on the sideline. It showed when Tony was feeling fragile on the blitz upon coming back onto the field and fumbled away because his turning movement seems limited. Weeden was the man for our team last night. And that said the entire night was mismanaged and the team regroups and moves on with a healthy #9

theSHOW · Oct 28, 2014

YOU PROBABLY COULD REMOVE THE DISCLAIMER NOW

Broges74 · Oct 28, 2014

I would have stuck with Weeden only due to the possibility of Romo taking another vicious hit and going back out. Weeden looked pretty sharp out there but if Garrett had thought Weeden would have lead us to victory, he would have went with him. Garrett had a perfectly made excuse in Romo's safety but he didn't. Garrett sees Weeden in practice and we don't...

black label · Oct 28, 2014

Do you remember the QB in Frisco with half a lung?

NoLuv4Jerry · Oct 28, 2014

Just because Romo could stand up straight and "somewhat" move around...does not mean he could play. His injury made him a liability out there. He could not drive the ball down the field. He was not seeing the blitz the ENTIRE night. He probably took a needle BEFORE the game. We know he took a needle while in the lockeroom in the 3rd quarter. He and Jerry made last night about THEM. Jerry donning the headsets during a LIVE NFL game. Romo running back on the field like Willis Reed. The Commanders were probably salivating when they saw Romo come back in the game. He did nothing because last night was NOT his night. And he was not man enough to admit that and do what was best for the team.

Staubacher · Oct 28, 2014

It wasn't the right decision. It wasn't the wrong decision.

It was the only decision.

Tractor1 · Oct 28, 2014

The Cowboys inability to protect made Romo look like a liability. He's the man and gives the team the best chance to win. If he's capable he should be in the game.

dallasdave · Oct 28, 2014

Oh_Canada said:
I would've stayed with Weeden, had Romo not had a history of back troubles I may have let him back in. The team just looked sharper with Weeden though.

Totally agree, Weeden looked good and too much risk putting Romo back in, also letting Weeden finish the game would have showed if he could win a game under pressure, and if Weeden won would have given him a lot of self confidence.

craig71 · Oct 28, 2014

I thought they should have stayed with Weeden. Romo looked confused last night from the very start and didn't look any better in closing out the 4th quarter. I wasn't all that thrilled with the sack fumble or the almost pick that Williams baled Romo out on to say the least.

Craig

PA Cowboy Fan · Oct 28, 2014

No Romo should have stayed out. It was too much of a risk putting him in and he didn't look right after they did. Weeden was playing well and we probably would have stayed with the running game more although I guess that's debatable. It's a long season. One loss to the Deadskins is not as important as keeping your QB healthy and he was getting slammed all night.

Jason 82 Witten · Oct 28, 2014

If Romo had led the Cowboys to a win, the decision on whether he should or shouldn't have returned wouldn't have been such a big deal

PA Cowboy Fan · Oct 28, 2014

craig71 said:
I thought they should have stayed with Weeden. Romo looked confused last night from the very start and didn't look any better in closing out the 4th quarter. I wasn't all that thrilled with the sack fumble or the almost pick that Williams baled Romo out on to say the least.

Craig

If I didn't know better he played like he had a concussion. He just didn't look right.

CT Dal Fan · Oct 28, 2014

Weeden was in for ten plays and he had a hot hand? I disagree. He missed Dez twice in the endzone, and nobody was within 20 yards of Jason Witten on the touchdown throw. Plus, he fumbled a handoff to Murray that was nearly a disaster. Romo gives the Cowboys the best chance to win; and if he's physically able to function, he should play.

PA Cowboy Fan · Oct 28, 2014

craig71 said:
I thought they should have stayed with Weeden. Romo looked confused last night from the very start and didn't look any better in closing out the 4th quarter. I wasn't all that thrilled with the sack fumble or the almost pick that Williams baled Romo out on to say the least.

Craig

Perhaps if the OL could protect him but that wasn't the case yesterday.

PJTHEDOORS · Oct 28, 2014

Supercowboy1986 said:
DISCLAIMER:

IF YOURE GOING GO BE AN IDIOT OR TROLL AND WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE ANY FORM OF DISCUSSION DO NOT BOTHER REPLYING. THIS IS A SERIOUS DEBATEABLE TOPIC AND THIS THREAD IS LOOKING FOR SERIOUS THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION.

Great way to start a thread, insulting members calling them idiots.

WV Cowboy · Oct 28, 2014

I wanted to stay with Weeden, only because I felt Romo was not 100%
Had Weeden sucked I would have put Romo in no matter what, but he didn't.
He did just what a backup is supposed to do when a starter gets injured.

We can talk all about Romo, turnovers, the blitz, Dez, ... whatever, ... but let's be honest.

The reason that we lost the game was because we took them lightly and we were not prepared enough.

We were not ready, plain and simple. And once you lose the momentum it is hard to regain it. It seemed like we were chasing the skins the whole night, even when we were up 10-7.

We took them lightly and overlooked them because they were 2-5, 3rd string QB, had lost 13 or 14 straight Divisional games.

We thought we could just show up and beat McCoy.

perrykemp · Oct 28, 2014

black label said:
Do you remember the QB in Frisco with half a lung?

Dude, that's why god gives us two of them!

Was it the right decision?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

JerryJonesMustGo

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Aut Viam Inveniam Aut Faciam

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Waitin' on the 6th

Well-Known Member