Obviously you cant read. Let me try this again. You said 4-12 without Romo. I pointed out Kitna won more games with the same exact team than Romo did that year. I am not saying Kitna was a great QB, I am simply pointing out the FACT that a backup QB won more games than Romo.
So obviously this team being 4-12 at best is absolute bull****, and so was your point. Not hard to understand, is it?
Now, if you said the Colts were 4-12 without Manning, then that would be correct. Colts won a Super Bowl with Manning, and sure as heck more than 2 wildcard playoff. They were a playoff team every year with Manning. Cowboys were not a playoff/Super Bowl team with our without Romo. Can you refute any of this or are you going to blindly ignore all these facts again? i am assuming it will be the latter.
Earl Morral won a Super Bowl as a back up with the exact same team as Bob Griese and Griese is in the HOF. That ends that.
What did you miss in 2015? We were 4-12 without Romo. So it's not bull*** and that was my point and that ends that.
In 2007 the Colts defense was ranked SECOND in the league and FIRST in points allowed led by an outstanding safety in Bob Sanders and edge rushers Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney.
Go ahead and name me ONE year in Romo's career where we had a Top 20 defense combine with two great edge rushers and a great safety. As Percy, a statistical expert on this board has pointed out many times, in NFL history, no team has EVER won a SB with a bottom ten DPR. During Romo's career we averaged 27th.
So I didn't ignore it - In fact won every single point and I did it in a point by point basis with exact examples to what you asked and did it without saying--
Screw him good riddance which you are apparently one of four people on here who feel like that out of hundreds.
But again - go ahead and say that Romo sucked becuase he didn't win. Say he didn't do his job, he underachieved and it was all on him.
I think we would all just like to hear you say it again.