Dak sure is lucky he isn't being given the "Romo" treatment

[CowboyFrog]

When it mattered most he played well. He brought us back from a two score deficit against Aaron Rodgers in a playoff game. We put up 30 points on the Packers that day and were just about to go to OT when our defense choked! The Cowboys never have the defense to go all the way. The same thing happened two years earlier in 2014 against Green Bay. In 2018 our defense spelled the end for us against the Rams in the playoffs.

No KJJ if its Dak then its his fault if its any other QB THEN it would be the defense...you know the drill. When you put 30 points up on offense its only good if certain QB's are playing if its a certain other QB then he should've scored 40 because you know Standards that cant be consistent. And Seattle come on dont all teams playoff D give up 250 rushing yards..and when they do is it not always the QB's fault?

 

[mattjames2010]

Zeke was one of the main reasons we made it to the playoffs in 2016 and had the success we did. The young players we had that season didn’t cost us that playoff game against Green Bay. You’re one of the most ill-informed fans I’ve ever encountered on this board. You’re completely off target on everything. A complete waste of time!

> made it to the playoffs

....but failed IN the playoffs. That's the point of the thread, Einstein. We're done here.

 

[KJJ]

No KJJ if its Dak then its his fault if its any other QB THEN it would be the defense...you know the drill. When you put 30 points up on offense its only good if certain QB's are playing if its a certain other QB then he should've scored 40 because you know Standards that cant be consistent. And Seattle come on dont all teams playoff D give up 250 rushing yards..and when they do is it not always the QB's fault?

According to many it’s always Dak’s fault. If he had played the last two weeks everyone would be saying we’re winning in spite of him.

 

[KJJ]

> made it to the playoffs

....but failed IN the playoffs. That's the point of the thread, Einstein. We're done here.

We failed in the playoffs with Romo every year. Go waste someone else’s time!

 

[CowboyFrog]

According to many it’s always Dak’s fault. If he had played the last two weeks everyone would be saying we’re winning in spite of him.

Yup

 

[mattjames2010]

No KJJ if its Dak then its his fault if its any other QB THEN it would be the defense...you know the drill. When you put 30 points up on offense its only good if certain QB's are playing if its a certain other QB then he should've scored 40 because you know Standards that cant be consistent. And Seattle come on dont all teams playoff D give up 250 rushing yards..and when they do is it not always the QB's fault?

It was both the fault of the defense and the inexperience of the rookie QB - you know, just like it has consistently been throughout NFL history. I know for some of you putting bias aside and analyzing that there can be two problems at the same time is too much for your pea brains to handle, but that's the case here.

We were going to face a historic offense at some point in the 2016 playoffs. This was a near sure thing - our defense would have struggled with it even IF it was a top defense. We knew this already going into the playoffs, yet we stuck with a rookie QB. It was a mistake, it proved to be a mistake, revisionism doesn't change the outcome of what happened.

 

[mattjames2010]

We failed in the playoffs with Romo every year. Go waste someone else’s time!

Yes, we lost games in the past for numerous reasons - we lost in 2016 BY ADMISSION OF THE VERY PLAYERS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT because of inexperience on offense. Yes, the defense wasn't great in 2016 - again, both problems can exist. Stay wrong and stay losing.

Who is up next?

 

[Vtwin]

When it mattered most he played well. He brought us back from a two score deficit against Aaron Rodgers in a playoff game. We put up 30 points on the Packers that day and were just about to go to OT when our defense choked! The Cowboys never have the defense to go all the way. The same thing happened two years earlier in 2014 against Green Bay. In 2018 our defense spelled the end for us against the Rams in the playoffs.

Every drive matters "most".

Matt Ryan destroyed that same defense one week later. With a defense that later became known for coughing up the biggest lead in SB history.

It could also be argued that the mismanagement of the last Cowboy's scoring drive by Dak spiking the ball to stop the clock after the big gainer, instead of just lining the team up and running a play against the exhausted GB defense. Instead of handing the ball of to his all-pro RB or tossing a swing pass to him, behind the best line in the NFL, to take advantage of the flustered defense he wasted a down, allowed the defense to settle themselves, couldn't convert the TD, settled for a FG and left time for the game winning drive by GB.

I know you're going to blame the coach for that, but an experienced vet would likely have been handled differently in that situation and might have even just done the right thing on his own, exhibiting real leadership.

 

[CowboyFrog]

It was both the fault of the defense and the inexperience of the rookie QB - you know, just like it has consistently been throughout NFL history. I know for some of you putting bias aside and analyzing that there can be two problems at the same time is too much for your pea brains to handle, but that's the case here.

We were going to face a historic offense at some point in the 2016 playoffs. This was a near sure thing - our defense would have struggled with it even IF it was a top defense. We knew this already going into the playoffs, yet we stuck with a rookie QB. It was a mistake, it proved to be a mistake, revisionism doesn't change the outcome of what happened.

your right revisionism doesnt and no one giving the chance of guessing would have said "30 points wont work"...what would Romo have done score 40? throw for 400 yards and 4 td's you know this how? Myself i would have started Romo had i been able TO KNOW FOR SURE he was not going to be crippled by the next sack....after what happened in the game i have very little confidence it would have changed the outcome

So where is the proof it was a mistake..you can not prove Romo puts up the numbers we are discussing

 

[Vtwin]

According to many it’s always Dak’s fault. If he had played the last two weeks everyone would be saying we’re winning in spite of him.

It's been my observation that "It's never Daks fault" is far more prevalent than "It's always Dak's fault".

Your comments in this thread back that up.

 

[CowboyFrog]

It's been my observation that "It's never Daks fault" is far more prevalent than "It's always Dak's fault".

Your comments in this thread back that up.

Well its not golf so your wrong both ways....

 

[Vtwin]

your right revisionism doesnt and no one giving the chance of guessing would have said "30 points wont work"...what would Romo have done score 40? throw for 400 yards and 4 td's you know this how? Myself i would have started Romo had i been able TO KNOW FOR SURE he was not going to be crippled by the next sack....after what happened in the game i have very little confidence it would have changed the outcome

So where is the proof it was a mistake..you can not prove Romo puts up the numbers we are discussing

Romo would likely have helped the team score earlier and more often which would have kept them out of the come from behind situation and limited GB's opportunities on offense. (Same thing happened in the Rams game)

You can't just look at the final box score and ignore the many nuances of how it went down to get there.

 

[Vtwin]

Well its not golf so your wrong both ways....

I didn't say either one of those was "right". My main point is that neither are realistic.

 

[mattjames2010]

your right revisionism doesnt and no one giving the chance of guessing would have said "30 points wont work"...what would Romo have done score 40? throw for 400 yards and 4 td's you know this how? Myself i would have started Romo had i been able TO KNOW FOR SURE he was not going to be crippled by the next sack....after what happened in the game i have very little confidence it would have changed the outcome

So where is the proof it was a mistake..you can not prove Romo puts up the numbers we are discussing

I don't know if we would have won - however, just going by the history of the NFL and it's patterns, having a rookie QB in playoffs leads you to an L. They don't win Super Bowls. We also have players from that 2016 team saying that inexperience played in a role in that loss. In a pressure situation with the lights as bright as they get, you want a veteran or experienced player who has bene there, even if they lost in that situation, to lead you.

It's insane that people are still arguing this when the very players are telling us what one of the problems of that 2016 game was. There was only upside to starting Romo, no downside. If Prescott broke because he had to watch from the sidelines, then he never was a true franchise QB.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Romo would likely have helped the team score earlier and more often which would have kept them out of the come from behind situation and limited GB's opportunities on offense. (Same thing happened in the Rams game)

You can't just look at the final box score and ignore the many nuances of how it went down to get there.

Again if we are going off of guessing, who's guess is better? what did Romo do in his last playoff action against GB? like i said, myself i would've started Romo but after watching the game do not think it would've changed the outcome.

 

[CowboyFrog]

I don't know if we would have won - however, just going by the history of the NFL and it's patterns, having a rookie QB in playoffs leads you to an L. They don't win Super Bowls. We also have players from that 2016 team saying that inexperience played in a role in that loss. In a pressure situation with the lights as bright as they get, you want a veteran or experienced player who has bene there, even if they lost in that situation, to lead you.

It's insane that people are still arguing this when the very players are telling us what one of the problems of that 2016 game was. There was only upside to starting Romo, no downside. If Prescott broke because he had to watch from the sidelines, then he never was a true franchise QB.

Who says Prescott would've broke? again your guessing it would've been diferent when in fact it was not the QB play that lost the game...thats what I'm saying before the game i would've started Romo after watching i dont think it would've changed anything...He was there 2 years earlier with a very similar team..and the defense once again could not stop A rod.

 

[Vtwin]

Again if we are going off of guessing, who's guess is better? what did Romo do in his last playoff action against GB? like i said, myself i would've started Romo but after watching the game do not think it would've changed the outcome.

Romo kept pace with the GB offense. Had the lead at halftime and going into the 4th qtr. He watched his RB fumble away another score and threw what should have been a career defining pass in the most crunchiest of crunch time, and finished with an incredible rating. He played a near perfect game.

With an even better running game, against an even weaker defense, it is very hard for me to imagine Romo doesn't give a much better chance in 2016.

As always though, to each his own.

 

[Miller]

Romo kept pace with the GB offense. Had the lead at halftime and going into the 4th qtr. He watched his RB fumble away another score and threw what should have been a career defining pass in the most crunchiest of crunch time, and finished with an incredible rating. He played a near perfect game.

With an even better running game, against an even weaker defense, it is very hard for me to imagine Romo doesn't give a much better chance in 2016.

As always though, to each his own.

As the years have passed I’ve learned to appreciate Romo more and more. He did so much with a dog water Oline and was a magician when needed. Yes he also blew games but overall he made a lot out of nothing. In fact this showed up on Twitter today. The guy basically had years where he had no time to plant and throw

 

[CowboyFrog]

Romo kept pace with the GB offense. Had the lead at halftime and going into the 4th qtr. He watched his RB fumble away another score and threw what should have been a career defining pass in the most crunchiest of crunch time, and finished with an incredible rating. He played a near perfect game.

With an even better running game, against an even weaker defense, it is very hard for me to imagine Romo doesn't give a much better chance in 2016.

As always though, to each his own.

Dak kept pace with the GB offense also took the lead did he not? again 2014 defense played a much better game than the 2016 defense did Romo was asked to throw the ball 19 times..compared to Dak's 38 times...the 2016 offense was not a pass happy offense...and again ill say i would've started Romo, but once again dont think it makes the defense hold the lead.

 

[Clove]

All of the coaches, owners, and players are defending Dak. In 2016, ownership was being very coy about the situation. I understand 13-3 is an impressive stat, but telling Romo that he can't even compete for the starting job is absolutely ridiculous.

This organization has actually done a good job at given Dak what he needs to be successful: great wrs, great rb, a good to great offensive line throughout most of his tenure and now a top level defense.

I do not believe Cooper Rush is a better quarterback than Dak Prescott. However, I think this coaching staff seems to manage the game better with Cooper at the helm. My hope is when Dak comes back, he sees how lucky he is that he still has that job because his opportunities are thinning out.

I think Romo got the best of all worlds. An undrafted free agent, becomes QB of America's team, plays with HOFs Terrell Owens, Jason Witten (future HOF), DeMarcus Ware, head coached by HOF Bill Parcells', plays over a decade, retires and gets the best job in football. How can anyone feel bad for Romo?