Anyone concerned about a "sophomore jinx" with Tony Romo???

[DIAF]

Your taking the side of DIAF?

oh i know why because he never says anything positive about our team.

DIAF, Munchies, CowboyBlog, all are basically the same person

 

[cowboyeric8]

Umm, this thread is heading into breakdown in 3 - 2 - 1

 

[maninabox]

romo didnt look to hot today...
what he was sacked 3 times, fumbled, threw 2 picks and under threw numerous passes, stuffed at the goaline and got booed...ouch

 

[SkinsandTerps]

I dont think that I have ever taken the side of Munchies, any of the Bledsoe sack huggers, and rarely with the likes of a few posters here that are just home fan board trolls.

I say what I have to say based on a thread by thread situation.

If you cant accept that people may disagree on one topic completely, and at the same time whole-heartedly agree on another topic, than you may need some professional counseling.

 

[Catch-22]

Sophomore jinx?

5th year senior jinx maybe...

 

[cowboys19]

I dont think that I have ever taken the side of Munchies, any of the Bledsoe sack huggers, and rarely with the likes of a few posters here that are just home fan board trolls.

I say what I have to say based on a thread by thread situation.

If you cant accept that people may disagree on one topic completely, and at the same time whole-heartedly agree on another topic, than you may need some professional counseling.

Those guys you mentioned have never agreed on any topic, that involves Cowboys unless its about OMG Bledsoe is GOD, or OMG Romo sucks hahahha i told you

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Way to throw up the strawman.

I didnt say that without Romo, we wouldnt have been in the playoffs. I said he DIDNT PLAY WELL the last 6 games of the season.

Answer the question. Are the numbers I posted what you consider "good"? Maybe you havent been a fan for very long, and you think that anything better than what Dallas has had at the QB position for the last 7 years HAS to be good by comparison. I however, do not.

Now answer the question. Yes or No. Are those numbers indicative of "GOOD" play from the QB position?

The numbers in question are not indicative of good QB play...nor are they indicative of Tony Romo. It's quite appropriate that you would discuss strawman building because anyone who would intimate that Romo should be judged solely on such a small sampling is guilty of another propaganda technique: card stacking, which describes the selective omission of data simply because it does not fit an argument.

Also, stating that "Tony Romo did not play well the last 6 games of the season" is not entirely true - he played very well against Atlanta and was largely responsible for the victory over New York. A more accurate statement would be that Tony Romo accumulated mediocre numbers over the last six weeks of the season; however, these numbers do not mean, or even imply, that Romo played poorly each week.

In my opinion, a player should be judged on every game in which he's played, not just the poor ones. Unquestionably, Romo performed poorly at times, but he also performed very, very well at times. In fact, he performed well enough and often enough to earn a Pro Bowl bid. He's certainly gained my confidence next season.

 

[Beast_from_East]

romo didnt look to hot today...
what he was sacked 3 times, fumbled, threw 2 picks and under threw numerous passes, stuffed at the goaline and got booed...ouch

Romo led the NFC back from a 2 TD deficit to tie the game before a Cardinal, of course, cost the entire NFC team.

If you watched the game, you would have noticed alot of QBs struggled today. Bulger swatting the ball like a butterfly and he was stipped by an invisible gopher. So I guess you think Bulger sucks now.

I guess you would pass on Vince also, he throw a pick at the 5 and fumbled the snap at his own 10 or so. Yea, he really sucks also.

Dude, you are so clueless about Romo it is not even funny. You mentioned the boos but not the cheers when he rallied the team back.

Selective memry..........pretty sad to be hatin on Romo

 

[gbrittain]

The numbers in question are not indicative of good QB play...nor are they indicative of Tony Romo. It's quite appropriate that you would discuss strawman building because anyone who would intimate that Romo should be judged solely on such a small sampling is guilty of another propaganda technique: card stacking, which describes the selective omission of data simply because it does not fit an argument.

Also, stating that "Tony Romo did not play well the last 6 games of the season" is not entirely true - he played very well against Atlanta and was largely responsible for the victory over New York. A more accurate statement would be that Tony Romo accumulated mediocre numbers over the last six weeks of the season; however, these numbers do not mean, or even imply, that Romo played poorly each week.

In my opinion, a player should be judged on every game in which he's played, not just the poor ones. Unquestionably, Romo performed poorly at times, but he also performed very, very well at times. In fact, he performed well enough and often enough to earn a Pro Bowl bid. He's certainly gained my confidence next season.

Welcome to the forum and you did in grand style with an excellent post!

 

[Seven]

The numbers in question are not indicative of good QB play...nor are they indicative of Tony Romo. It's quite appropriate that you would discuss strawman building because anyone who would intimate that Romo should be judged solely on such a small sampling is guilty of another propaganda technique: card stacking, which describes the selective omission of data simply because it does not fit an argument.

Also, stating that "Tony Romo did not play well the last 6 games of the season" is not entirely true - he played very well against Atlanta and was largely responsible for the victory over New York. A more accurate statement would be that Tony Romo accumulated mediocre numbers over the last six weeks of the season; however, these numbers do not mean, or even imply, that Romo played poorly each week.

In my opinion, a player should be judged on every game in which he's played, not just the poor ones. Unquestionably, Romo performed poorly at times, but he also performed very, very well at times. In fact, he performed well enough and often enough to earn a Pro Bowl bid. He's certainly gained my confidence next season.

Bravo, my good man. I must say, that was quite refreshing. Cheerio!

 

[Da Hammer]

I am concerned for the reason that Romo to be honest has proved nothing yet. he is still very young and obviously has a lot to learn. you gotta be concerned about any player until they do it consistently for a long time. i love Romo but like any young QB he still has a way to go

 

[maninabox]

Romo led the NFC back from a 2 TD deficit to tie the game before a Cardinal, of course, cost the entire NFC team.

If you watched the game, you would have noticed alot of QBs struggled today. Bulger swatting the ball like a butterfly and he was stipped by an invisible gopher. So I guess you think Bulger sucks now.

I guess you would pass on Vince also, he throw a pick at the 5 and fumbled the snap at his own 10 or so. Yea, he really sucks also.

Dude, you are so clueless about Romo it is not even funny. You mentioned the boos but not the cheers when he rallied the team back.

Selective memry..........pretty sad to be hatin on Romo

I didnt say Romo sucked. I pointed out he didnt do well in the game. You need to take a chill pill buddy.

 

[smarta5150]

I am gonna be honest... I didnt read too in depth here so if I am out of place ignore me or let me have it, whatever.

I was just curious if this topic came about because Romo didnt look so sharp in the Pro Bowl?

If so, you do realize Romo hasnt seriously played or practice in a about a month? He also only had a week to work on timing with his WRs? He also had an offensive line tonight that played like our Cowboys offensive line... which was awful?
Like I said... if I am out of place just tell me... I didnt read all 4 pages. :

 

[Hostile]

The numbers in question are not indicative of good QB play...nor are they indicative of Tony Romo. It's quite appropriate that you would discuss strawman building because anyone who would intimate that Romo should be judged solely on such a small sampling is guilty of another propaganda technique: card stacking, which describes the selective omission of data simply because it does not fit an argument.

Also, stating that "Tony Romo did not play well the last 6 games of the season" is not entirely true - he played very well against Atlanta and was largely responsible for the victory over New York. A more accurate statement would be that Tony Romo accumulated mediocre numbers over the last six weeks of the season; however, these numbers do not mean, or even imply, that Romo played poorly each week.

In my opinion, a player should be judged on every game in which he's played, not just the poor ones. Unquestionably, Romo performed poorly at times, but he also performed very, very well at times. In fact, he performed well enough and often enough to earn a Pro Bowl bid. He's certainly gained my confidence next season.

Oh I am so going to like reading your stuff if this is an example of what it will be like.

to the forum.

 

[MossBurner]

Forget the sophomore jinx! What about the second half of his freshman season?!

 

[Hostile]

Forget the sophomore jinx! What about the second half of his freshman season?!

Who left the gate open again. The farm animals are out in the yard.

 

[philo beddoe]

Nice personal attack there.

How so?

 

[philo beddoe]

Sophomore jinx?

5th year senior jinx maybe...

As a starter, you know what he meant.

 

[Hostile]

I left the old handle in my title so posters would know who i was when Hostile changed my nick for me.

Removed so you don't have to explain it any more. If you want a custom one, let me know.

 

[TheProphet]

Removed so you don't have to explain it any more. If you want a custom one, let me know.

Thanks buddy. Not sure why this guy felt compelled to keep it for so long. Geez. LOL.