Romo’s defense gave up 20 points a game in 2007. All he had to do was score 21 to win. And he did because they won 13 games…just to lose to the dog butted Giants. Now please explain to me how Dak losing to the Packers this year is different than Romo losing to the Giants in 2007? Oh wait they actually had a bye…and still lost.
Dog butted giants? The ones who went on to win the superbowl and upset the undefeated Patriots? The ones who lead the league in sacks and I believe turnovers as well(don't remember exactly)? The ones who held every playoff opponent to under 20 points?
Dak did absolutely nothing agaisnt the Packers until they pulled there starters at the end of the game. Put his defense in bad spots, gave them 14pts and kept the defense on the field when they were gassed already. This is without getting into how atrocious the defense was.
Romo played well enough that we should have beaten the Giants by two scores easily. Even agaisnt the Giants defense. He is not the reason we lost the game. Crayton dropped what have been a huge 40+ gain or argurbly a td in the first half, 2nd half we had a dropped pass in the endzone which we settled for a FG, then crayton stopped short on what have been a wide open TD to win the game. Absurd we didn't win thst game by 14 pts honestly
So yea not even remotely close. You can't be serious lol