FVSTONE
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 4,188
- Reaction score
- 3,140
Hmm, I thought Tony looked like he was in a lot of pain on the sideline when he was demoted to 2nd string QB. If I had a knife in my back, I guess I would be in pain too.............
Dak and Zeke are were also inseparable friends. Cant have all those parties and get togethers with Dak being the second string QB. I don't think Romo went out and partied with them. There was IMO a group thing going on and Romo was a bit outside that personal friends party group.
No, season-ending "elimination games" don't count as playoff games. That's total horse crap.You conveniently left out Romo’s postseason fumbles. He had 8 compared to only one for Dak. Romo also lost three season finale elimination games, which were like playoff games. The NFC East was on the line in each one of those games and the loser was eliminated. We got destroyed by Philly 44-6. Romo had an INT and 2 fumbles. Against the Giants in 2011 he had an INT and a fumble. He had 3 INTs against Washington in 2012. We were decisively beaten in all three games.
Yes, he needed an all pro, and most expensive Oline in history and if any of them missed the offense went into the hole…..Garrett did some good here though. He was a big reason for the emphasis of offensive line otherwise Jerry was still gonna sign the Nate Livings of the world.
Agree, but that's a big If.If he was healthy enough to play, Romo still should have been the QB that year.
I still think that was the wrong decision.
For the last time, his injuries were bad luckRomo had failed to finish the last 3 games he'd tried playing. I am not sure he'd have made it to halftime in the GB playoff game. His body was shot.
Keep knocking on the door and eventually, you may break through.Both Dak and Romo are 2-4 in the playoffs. That better improve for Dak this year or they're the same QB. No matter what he's either going to have a better playoff record than Romo or worse. So let's not act like Dak has a great playoff record either so far.
They partied their tails off those first 2-3 years. Saw them out a lot.Dak and Zeke are were also inseparable friends. Cant have all those parties and get togethers with Dak being the second string QB. I don't think Romo went out and partied with them. There was IMO a group thing going on and Romo was a bit outside that personal friends party group.
Season finale elimination games are just like playoff games. They’re do or die with the winner moving on and the loser going home. They’re only horse crap to the Romo lovers.No, season-ending "elimination games" don't count as playoff games. That's total horse crap.
Playoff games are playoff games.
Romo had his shot at Green Bay and failedThen Green Bay, which was a HORRIBLE defensive team, was down 31-7 early the next playoff game. That said nothing.
Well he sucked as a coach lol….I’m just saying he did do some good things lol. Or they did some good things in spite of him. One of the two lol.Yes, he needed an all pro, and most expensive Oline in history and if any of them missed the offense went into the hole…..
Wow moronic post alertTerrible leader like I said.
I am of the opinion it was more in spite of then because ofWell he sucked as a coach lol….I’m just saying he did do some good things lol. Or they did some good things in spite of him. One of the two lol.
Old head stop responding to my posts.Wow moronic post alert
Gene Steratore failed.Romo had his shot at Green Bay and failed
Dan Campbell and Siriani seem to go for it half the time regardless of distanceNo joke. Only freaking thing Garrett COULD bring was he knew what made him and Aikman win in the 90's. A damn good offensive line. And he can't even use it to his advantage. Although in his defense, times have changed pretty quickly on 4th down calls. I remember one of Aikman's recent shows talking about how Belichick was the pioneer of some of those aggressive 4th down calls, which wasn't all that long ago. Now it happens every week, especially with Coach Mac.
Very possible lolI am of the opinion it was more in spite of then because of