There is no intelligent reason to make Romo play Sunday

TheRat · Dec 22, 2014

The dude has been in the league since 2003 and has been starting games since 2006. The idea that a grizzled veteran like him can't take a game off to keep his momentum going is frankly idiotic. Risking your franchise QB with a bad back in a meaningless game is insane. Full stop.

joseephuss · Dec 22, 2014

Romo wants to play. Most players do. There is a remote chance they can get a bye. If there is just a small chance you play to win the game and you do that by playing your starting QB.

Tabascocat · Dec 22, 2014

He should be the only one excused from that game, maybe Ro too. Murray will play just enough to break the record then call it a day.

I have been saying for the starters to play to keep that edge and momentum but Tony can obviously skip it.

Kevinicus · Dec 22, 2014

joseephuss said:
Romo wants to play. Most players do. There is a remote chance they can get a bye. If there is just a small chance you play to win the game and you do that by playing your starting QB.

A .01% chance of the game having any meeting is not worth the much higher, and much more costly chance that he gets hurt.

reddyuta · Dec 22, 2014

joseephuss said:
Romo wants to play. Most players do. There is a remote chance they can get a bye. If there is just a small chance you play to win the game and you do that by playing your starting QB.

I want him to play too but this game is to roll the juggernaut into the playoffs,it doesnt make any difference whether we win or not.

Blackspider214 · Dec 22, 2014

joseephuss said:
Romo wants to play. Most players do. There is a remote chance they can get a bye. If there is just a small chance you play to win the game and you do that by playing your starting QB.

There are 2 scenarios to get a bye:

1. Det/GB end in a tie.
2. BOTH Seattle and Arizona lose. Seattle hosts the Rams and Cardinals play Niners.

The first scenario has about a .000001 chance of happening.
The second scenario is very unlikely just because Seattle is not losing to the Rams.

But here's the kicker. If scenario 2 happens, we get a bye. No matter the result of our game. We can lose and still get a bye if this scenario happens.
Scenario 1 requires us to actually win.

Play Romo and the starters a couple of series to establish something and then sit them. It realistically means nada. Of course they want to play. They are pros and only play 16 of these a year. No pro athlete worth anything will tell you he wants to sit. But this is where the head coach and the staff has to make those decisions for them.

TheRat · Dec 22, 2014

joseephuss said:
Romo wants to play. Most players do. There is a remote chance they can get a bye. If there is just a small chance you play to win the game and you do that by playing your starting QB.

But Jason is the head coach. Romo can want to play as much as he wants. But Garrett makes the final call. Throwing your QB out there against a blitz happy team that would like for nothing more than to beat the ever loving crap out of your QB is not smart.

There is a much greater chance of Romo getting a serious injury than us getting a bye.

bark · Dec 22, 2014

Sit romo. That is all thank you

Nirvana · Dec 22, 2014

I'm torn on this issue and would prefer he rest the whole game, but can compromise with playing a half. I think guys like him and Ro should rest.

mldardy · Dec 22, 2014

There is no good reason for playing any of our key players. The goal and only goal is to be healthy and ready for the playoffs.

yimyammer · Dec 22, 2014

Nirvana said:
I'm torn on this issue and would prefer he rest the whole game, but can compromise with playing a half. I think guys like him and Ro should rest.

I just don't see any point in playing only a half unless they planned all week to go out and win the game and Romo & Co take a 28-0 lead into the half.

Playing to get some reps just seems pointless, go for the win or sit em

Cowboys22 · Dec 22, 2014

The last two times we have played the skins, they have put Romo out with an injury. They appear to have getting clean shots on him as part of their gameplan and they aren't afraid to man up the WRs and bring everyone else to get to Romo. It makes no sense to subject Romo to that when the only benefit from a win comes if gab and Det tie. Come on. That's never going to happen so the game is meaningless. Treat this week as your bye and go into the playoffs healthy and rested.

Nirvana · Dec 22, 2014

yimyammer said:
I just don't see any point in playing only a half unless they planned all week to go out and win the game and Romo & Co take a 28-0 lead into the half.

Playing to get some reps just seems pointless, go for the win or sit em

I think Garrett is going to go for the win and play 'em like any other week. It's a gamble on his part. I wonder what Jerry thinks about it?

DandyDon1722 · Dec 22, 2014

Would anything salvage the Commanders season more than knocking Romo out of the playoffs and thus knocking the Cowboys out of the playoffs.

Sit him.

mldardy · Dec 22, 2014

Cowboys22 said:
The last two times we have played the skins, they have put Romo out with an injury. They appear to have getting clean shots on him as part of their gameplan and they aren't afraid to man up the WRs and bring everyone else to get to Romo. It makes no sense to subject Romo to that when the only benefit from a win comes if gab and Det tie. Come on. That's never going to happen so the game is meaningless. Treat this week as your bye and go into the playoffs healthy and rested.

Romo, Murray, Dez, Witten, Martin, and McClain shouldn't see the field Sunday. Can't think of any one else but start with those players for sure.

Ken · Dec 22, 2014

Seattle and Arizona both losing is a very real possibility. 49ers will likely beat Arizona and St. Louis is coming off a tough loss after a good streak of playing very well and would like nothing better than to spoil some pf their division rivals thunder by putting a L on them.

I think they have to play and to win. A bye is THAT important.

Cowboys22 · Dec 22, 2014

mldardy said:
Romo, Murray, Dez, Witten, Martin, and McClain shouldn't see the field Sunday. Can't think of any one else but start with those players for sure.

I wouldn't play Tyron either.

mldardy · Dec 22, 2014

Cowboys22 said:
I wouldn't play Tyron either.

Yeah but who plays the other tackle spot. I'm all for it but don't know who plays that other tackle spot.

Tabascocat · Dec 22, 2014

There is a downside to letting half of the team off. If our most important players sit and the rest are mixed with back-ups, there is more concern about injuries.

You can't go in planning on a loss but starting half of the starters, that is a recipe for disaster. Either go all in(minus Romo for most if not all of the game) or sit the most that you can and tell them to just go through the motions.

In my experience in playing sports, if you play to avoid injuries, they happen more frequently. It is in the back of their minds to avoid contact, etc.

They have two options:
1. play to win
2. plan on the loss and use a simple game-plan while resting as many as they can

But, it is difficult to do both.

mldardy · Dec 22, 2014

Ken said:
Seattle and Arizona both losing is a very real possibility. 49ers will likely beat Arizona and St. Louis is coming off a tough loss after a good streak of playing very well and would like nothing better than to spoil some pf their division rivals thunder by putting a L on them.

I think they have to play and to win. A bye is THAT important.

Arizona definitely. The only way I see St. Louis having any chance is starting Austin Davis. I don't understand Fisher's fascination with Shaun Hill. He will get absolutely lit up by Seattle. Watch as I say this Hill will play the game of his life lol.

Pessimist_cowboy · Dec 22, 2014

we are going to play to win.

There is no intelligent reason to make Romo play Sunday

The Silly Willy

Well-Known Member

Dexternjack

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Silly Willy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

It's been a good 'un, ain't it?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Dexternjack

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member