Dak vs Romo: Just the Facts

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Romo didn't throw very many interceptions but just had the absolute uncanny ability of being able to throw one when it was impossible to overcome.

As a result the ones he threw became very memorable.

well, on the surface...his Int% was about 2.7%....Dak is 2%
for comparison in 2024, 2.7% would rank 31st worst among QBs....

Romo kinds flinged it a lot of times, which is why Parcells always felt he has to rein him in.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

lol..

That guy really just said Dak would have won, on the road in sub-freezing temperatures in an open-air stadium on the road, when Dak is arguably one of the worst QBs on the road, let alone grass…

Dallas was undefeated on the road led by 2014 Romo until that game, while GB was undefeated at home. And that too with a defense without Sean Lee the whole year.

This wasn’t the 2016 GB team whose defense was allowing 400 plus yards a game nor was it the 2016 defense that had a healthy Sean Lee for 15 games and had his best season ever.

oh, no it gets worse. when he plays in ourdoor stadiums west of mississipi and north of 62.434 longtitude in 4:00 PM games his record is absolutley abysmall, he has never won one...a big fat zero



so Khiladi, how far did you have to reach up your rear end to pull that one out?

 

[SultanOfSix]

I’m curious, in all of these bogus stats of “win or go home games” which team was at home which was the favored team? Also, what are the same questions for the playoffs? Now, which of the two QBs performed better considering those factors?

In the playoffs, Romo played well against Philly and Detroit at home, the latter being the 2nd ranked defense that year and led the game winning drive against. He performed well on the road but lost in GB due to the catch that was not a catch. Performed OK against the Giants—another D that became strong during their SB run—but lost at home. Was bad against Minnesota but so was the offensive line and the rest of the team. Played fine in Seattle but lost due to the fumbled field goal snap even though he drove down the field with four minutes left to set it up.

How did Dak do?

 

[Runwildboys]

In 2015 he was on pace for his worst year of his career.

Could that have anything to do with the plethora of injuries?

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

I’m curious, in all of these bogus stats of “win or go home games” which team was at home which was the favored team? Also, what are the same questions for the playoffs? Now, which of the two QBs performed better considering those factors?

In the playoffs, Romo played well against Philly and Detroit at home, the latter being the 2nd ranked defense that year and led the game winning drive against. He performed well on the road but lost in GB due to the catch that was not a catch. Performed OK against the Giants—another D that became strong during their SB run—but lost at home. Was bad against Minnesota but so was the offensive line and the rest of the team. Played fine in Seattle but lost due to the fumbled field goal snap even though he drove down the field with four minutes left to set it up.

How did Dak do?

That's exactly right. People are VERY lazy...and just go to "neither succeeded". Or "cabo". (Sorry if I am the first to mention it HERE...but it's ubiquitous) .


There are stories inside those playoff win loss records that need to be said for the win-loss to make any sense.

But we are as polarized in sports as in any other endeavor. Saying one thing nice means you think that one never ever erred, or that the other guy sucks and now it's WAR! For some people it can't be a mixture of things....the hard line is drawn, any opposition must be set straight.

The stories in the stats...or else the stats are meaningless.

 

[Vtwin]

Again here we go with "people like you" . Who are these people you keep referring to?

The contingent who seem to have some emotional attachment to one QB and find excuses for his failure while completely ignoring the fact that those same excuses could be equally applied to the other QB.

And I clearly criticized both...

You literally called out Romo for his part in the win and you in games, but did not apply the same standards to Dak in the significant losses suffered under his watch. You even responded with a "yea but" response doubling down on the double standard. It's right here in black and white.

And like I said both were crap. No excuses. Neither got it done. You sound like you want to excuse Romo because of what "some people" said about Dak. Your Romo defense is a Dak excuse!!!!!!

Like I've already said, twice, this isn't about excusing, or blaming either QB. Why do your refuse to acknowledge that I have said that twice, now three times? That is a rhetorical question btw. We know the answer.

If you think Dak shouldn't get an excuse. Why are you defending Romo with the same Dak excuse. Makes zero sense.

Again, for the fourth time, it's not about excusing or blaming. It's about applying the same standards to both.

It is interesting that you have not addressed the relevant points I have made regarding the evidence of the double standard. You create fallacious arguments based on incorrect assumptions of my motives then preach from that flimsy pulpit. It makes zero sense to you because your emotions aren't allowing you to actually understand what you are reading.

What makes no sense is how, no matter how simply and directly I state the bottom line point being made, you cling to your emotional interpretation that I am "defending" , or blaming one or the other.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

The contingent who seem to have some emotional attachment to one QB and find excuses for his failure while completely ignoring the fact that those same excuses could be equally applied to the other QB.


You literally called out Romo for his part in the win and you in games, but did not apply the same standards to Dak in the significant losses suffered under his watch. You even responded with a "yea but" response doubling down on the double standard. It's right here in black and white.

Like I've already said, twice, this is about excusing, or blaming either QB. Why do your refuse to acknowledge that I have said that twice, now three times? That is a rhetorical question btw. We know the answer.

Again, for the fourth time, it's not about excusing or blaming. It's about applying the same standards to both.

It is interesting that you have not addressed the relevant points I have made regarding the evidence of the double standard. You create fallacious arguments based on incorrect assumptions of my motives then preach from that flimsy pulpit. It makes zero sense to you because your emotions aren't allowing you to actually understand what you are reading.

What makes no sense is how, no matter how simply and directly I state the bottom line point being made, you cling to your emotional interpretation that I am "defending" , or blaming one or the other.

My compliments. That was some effort for someone who just does care about the truth.

If that were a real...."person"...he'd a said "dang bro...thought about it and yer right"...or something like it.

 

[DallasEast]

STOP THE NAMECALLING!

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Could that have anything to do with the plethora of injuries?

Possibly.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The contingent who seem to have some emotional attachment to one QB and find excuses for his failure while completely ignoring the fact that those same excuses could be equally applied to the other QB.


You literally called out Romo for his part in the win and you in games, but did not apply the same standards to Dak in the significant losses suffered under his watch. You even responded with a "yea but" response doubling down on the double standard. It's right here in black and white.

Like I've already said, twice, this isn't about excusing, or blaming either QB. Why do your refuse to acknowledge that I have said that twice, now three times? That is a rhetorical question btw. We know the answer.

Again, for the fourth time, it's not about excusing or blaming. It's about applying the same standards to both.

It is interesting that you have not addressed the relevant points I have made regarding the evidence of the double standard. You create fallacious arguments based on incorrect assumptions of my motives then preach from that flimsy pulpit. It makes zero sense to you because your emotions aren't allowing you to actually understand what you are reading.

What makes no sense is how, no matter how simply and directly I state the bottom line point being made, you cling to your emotional interpretation that I am "defending" , or blaming one or the other.

Vtwin lying and gaslighting.

 

[Vtwin]

Vtwin lying and gaslighting.

Yet you can't point out one single lie.

Stalker. lol

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Yet you can't point out one single lie.

Stalker. lol

you don’t apply the same standards to both lol. I’ve never heard you say one positive thing about Dak lol

 

[LACowboysFan1]

Haven't we heard enough of this?

NOBODY'S changing their mind about either of them. Neither have delivered a SB win, or gotten their team to the NFC championship, etc. etc. etc.

The only thing that matters is winning SBs. And the only difference between the two is that Dak still has to opportunity to do so, since he's an active player. Not that there's much, if any, chance of that happening with Jerry and Stephen in charge, regardless of what Dak does.

Can't we just move on from this?????

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Haven't we heard enough of this?

NOBODY'S changing their mind about either of them. Neither have delivered a SB win, or gotten their team to the NFC championship, etc. etc. etc.

The only thing that matters is winning SBs. And the only difference between the two is that Dak still has to opportunity to do so, since he's an active player. Not that there's much, if any, chance of that happening with Jerry and Stephen in charge, regardless of what Dak does.

Can't we just move on from this?????

This is what I was talking about. "the only thing that matter is super bowls wins". Very sorry...no insult intended...but I just don't abide that.

We can look a LOT of average QB's that won super bowls. We can see several VERY good QB's that didn't. So right off the bat it's NOT just about SBs....barely scratching the surface of it.

Now..."move on from this"...I think is a VERY good idea!

Nobody is interesting in cherry-picking a handful of stats to make one look good and the other look bad. Well...a FEW are...but it's silly. If one is to compare then has to be a deep dive. Not many interested in THAT either!

 

[Vtwin]

you don’t apply the same standards to both lol. I’ve never heard you say one positive thing about Dak lol

Now point out the positive things I've said about Romo.

Even with that said, you seem to think being equitable in standards means the same conclusion must be drawn. I mean, I get it. Some people need to keep things as simple as possible. Either because you are incapable of digging any deeper, or your goal is to protect your previously established and massively over simplified opinion. Heck. in this thread you've already stated that a QB was on pace to have the worst year of his career and then when it was pointed out to you that the QB was trying to play through injuries (missed the majority of the season after trying to come back too early) the best you could muster was that it "possibly" contributed. Perfect example of a poorly thought out and agenda driven opinion given not to objectively consider the situation, but to defend the castle, so to speak. Also an example of just how hard it is for you to accept that you might be wrong.

You need to be right. Truth be damned.

 

[Vtwin]

This is what I was talking about. "the only thing that matter is super bowls wins". Very sorry...no insult intended...but I just don't abide that.

We can look a LOT of average QB's that won super bowls. We can see several VERY good QB's that didn't. So right off the bat it's NOT just about SBs....barely scratching the surface of it.

Now..."move on from this"...I think is a VERY good idea!

Nobody is interesting in cherry-picking a handful of stats to make one look good and the other look bad. Well...a FEW are...but it's silly. If one is to compare then has to be a deep dive. Not many interested in THAT either!

This sums it up very well.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Now point out the positive things I've said about Romo.

Even with that said, you seem to think being equitable in standards means the same conclusion must be drawn. I mean, I get it. Some people need to keep things as simple as possible. Either because you are incapable of digging any deeper, or your goal is to protect your previously established and massively over simplified opinion. Heck. in this thread you've already stated that a QB was on pace to have the worst year of his career and then when it was pointed out to you that the QB was trying to play through injuries (missed the majority of the season after trying to come back too early) the best you could muster was that it "possibly" contributed. Perfect example of a poorly thought out and agenda driven opinion given not to objectively consider the situation, but to defend the castle, so to speak. Also an example of just how hard it is for you to accept that you might be wrong.

You need to be right. Truth be damned.

No insult intended but the guy is an ultimate gas lighter. Just churn and turn and churn some more...to TRY to outwit and win. The more you provide facts and truth the more churn.

That's cool...no problem...we all have to be who we are. No judging. You just have to decide how much you invest in it. Modern social media.