First 39 Starts of career- Romo/Prescott

[uvaballa]

So you are saying that it's perfectly reasonable to assume that professional athletes will be just as fast, just as strong and just as good in their mid-to-late 30s as they were 10 years earlier?

If you guys would make the statement that Terrell Owens in 2007 was better than any receiver on the Cowboys roster right now, I would agree with you 100%. But that's not good enough for you. You need to repeat this mantra that Romo had a hall of fame wide receiver "in his prime" ostensibly making it so much easier for him to succeed

It's a false statement.

Written is a hall of fame receiver. He catches passes correct?

 

[Batman1980]

Who's Written?

 

[starcity214]

You’re right, you’re right.

One of the top 3 wide receivers in league history only produced because Romo was the QB.

Was TO throwing the ball to himself?
A receiver needs a QB that can get him the ball..

Why can't people understand this ?

 

[uvaballa]

What about Randy Moss? People said he was past his Prime in his late 30s cuz he had 3 Bad seasons in a row cuz

Goes to New England and catches 23 touchdowns in one season

Why is it so bad to know that even with an all time great receiver the quarterback still makes a difference?

It's a simple truth

Owens was an All Pro with McNabb. The guy had an average completion percentage and wasn’t known for being accurate. T.O balled out with just about any QB he had. He also got hurt the second year in Philly and still balled out in SB while his QB was puking.

 

[HungryLion]

Was TO throwing the ball to himself?
A receiver needs a QB that can get him the ball..

Why can't people understand this ?

Where did I argue against that?

You’re arguing against a point I never made.

 

[Number1]

For the 7,000,000th time

Romo DID NOT have TO in his prime

TO was 34 in 2007

Still a darn good receiver but past his prime.

true. but did get 15 TDs out of him

 

[G2]

Was TO throwing the ball to himself?
A receiver needs a QB that can get him the ball..

Why can't people understand this ?

People do understand it, but that's really not the point. Because plenty of other also threw the ball to Owens and he was elite just about everywhere.

 

[BoysForLife]

People do understand it, but that's really not the point. Because plenty of other also threw the ball to Owens and he was elite just about everywhere.

Except in Dallas, with Bledsoe
Where he was on Pace for 870 yards.

TO was incredible player. Deserving Hall of Fame inductee.

He and Romo benefited greatly from playing together. However neither carried the other. They accomplished a lot together and apart as well

This whole thing started over a semantical discussion about what age a player is in his prime

at the end of the day I find it amazing that a Hall of Fame wide receiver who played with a lot of really good quarterbacks had the second best year of his illustrious career at age 34 playing with a first year starter

I think that says a lot about TO but it also says an awful lot about the guy slinging it. Since this is a thread devoted to comparison to the first 39 games for Romo/Prescott, people have offered the opinion that the comparison isn't valid because Romo had TO for two years "in his prime"

I tend to think that certainly helped Romo. But I also am convinced that if the situation were reversed no way TO puts up the same type numbers with Dak at age 34. And the excuse offered would be " well sure he had TO but he was past his prime"

Which is pretty much the same thing said with regards to Dez

No, Dez isn't TO. But he was the all time leading TD catcher in franchise history by age 27. At which point (we're told) he forgot how to play the game

End of the day Numbers will be twisted to excuse Prescott and diminish Romo. That's the entire point of this thread

If you played with Dak you were washed up at 27. If you played with Romo you were still at the top of your potential into your late 30's

The play of the quarterback had/has nothing to do with that. It's just the way it is.

 

[BoysForLife]

Who's Written?

Apparently a hall of fame receiver

And all these years I thought he was a TE

 

[uvaballa]

Lol fans crying about a fair comparison. You’re comparing a guy who sat on the bench and got to learn for a few years with a HOF coach to a guy thrown into the fire with an average coach.

I could care less who’s the QB because I don’t really get attached to certain players. For some reason this fan base falls in love with guys. Very weird IMO.

 

[HungryLion]

Except in Dallas, with Bledsoe
Where he was on Pace for 870 yards.

TO was incredible player. Deserving Hall of Fame inductee.

He and Romo benefited greatly from playing together. However neither carried the other. They accomplished a lot together and apart as well

This whole thing started over a semantical discussion about what age a player is in his prime

at the end of the day I find it amazing that a Hall of Fame wide receiver who played with a lot of really good quarterbacks had the second best year of his illustrious career at age 34 playing with a first year starter

I think that says a lot about TO but it also says an awful lot about the guy slinging it. Since this is a thread devoted to comparison to the first 39 games for Romo/Prescott, people have offered the opinion that the comparison isn't valid because Romo had TO for two years "in his prime"

I tend to think that certainly helped Romo. But I also am convinced that if the situation were reversed no way TO puts up the same type numbers with Dak at age 34. And the excuse offered would be " well sure he had TO but he was past his prime"

Which is pretty much the same thing said with regards to Dez

No, Dez isn't TO. But he was the all time leading TD catcher in franchise history by age 27. At which point (we're told) he forgot how to play the game

End of the day Numbers will be twisted to excuse Prescott and diminish Romo. That's the entire point of this thread

If you played with Dak you were washed up at 27. If you played with Romo you were still at the top of your potential into your late 30's

The play of the quarterback had/has nothing to do with that. It's just the way it is.

I think the arguments overall started, because if you read some posters on this board, you would think Romo never had any help and spent his whole career playing with scrubs.

As much as I like Romo. An as good as I think Romo was. It’s just not true.

There’s a lot of revisionist history on this message board.

Meaning no offense to you. It’s gotten to the point where people take it as an attack on Romo for pointing out that he played with a hall of fame receiver. Saying “his stats got better with Romo throwing”.

The thing is. I recognize football is a team sport and it takes a team to win. It takes 11 guys on offense or defense to make things happen.

Some people just what to give all the credit, or blame, to one person. When it comes to Romo and Dak for that matter.

 

[BoysForLife]

I think the arguments overall started, because if you read some posters on this board, you would think Romo never had any help and spent his whole career playing with scrubs.

As much as I like Romo. An as good as I think Romo was. It’s just not true.

There’s a lot of revisionist history on this message board.

All of his career? No. Not at all

Most of it? I think you could make a good argument for that if you want to

Ask yourself this--
Other than Terrell Owens for 2 years and Roy Williams for same duration, name one single wide receiver that Tony Romo had during his career that produced at a high level with any other quarterback, either with the Cowboys or on another team

 

[TruBluSince1982]

When exactly did Larry Fitzgerald's "prime" end? Just curious, which year?

 

[HungryLion]

All of his career? No. Not at all

Most of it? I think you could make a good argument for that if you want to

Ask yourself this--
Other than Terrell Owens for 2 years and Roy Williams for same duration, name one single wide receiver that Tony Romo had during his career that produced at a high level with any other quarterback, either with the Cowboys or on another team

Im not arguing Romo didn’t play on same bad teams. He did.

What I’m saying is, it’s laughable that some people are going back, revising history, and making some of the great players he did have around him, seem worse than they were. For what? Because they miss Romo, because they are miserable now that Dak is starting? I don’t understand the reason.

 

[uvaballa]

When exactly did Larry Fitzgerald's "prime" end? Just curious, which year?

Prime is a touchy subject. Guys like Brady and Brees aren’t in their prime so their WRs and RBs would be better if they had those two in their primes.

 

[Captain-Crash]

Who's Written?

I've written a bunch but nothing that makes sense, or cents.
can somebody show that preseason td... man that was a thing of beauty..... can you say canton...

 

[Pass2Run]

The truth is Dak's game has suffered ever since Romo stopped coaching him up.

 

[Hadenough]

There is only one bottom line way to look at Dak Prescott and its not comparing his first 39 starts to Romo! Its not stats or his ability to run or his supporting cast. People just take a good look at his throwing ability. In his 3rd year in the league I have yet to see him make any wow throws regardless of if their caught or not. Dak is most efficient throwing the ball between the numbers and 10 yards down the field. He never throws the ball until he visually sees his guy open instead of throwing the ball while the WR is making his break. If Dak is not able to set his feet he really struggles to get anything on the ball. These are all things people can actually see while watching the game. This isnt as simple as saying Dak will get better. Yes Dak will once in a while make that throw to Gallup on the sidelines about 30 yds down field but he simply doesnt have the arm or accuracy to make the deeper throws with any consistency.

 

[BoysForLife]

There is only one bottom line way to look at Dak Prescott and its not comparing his first 39 starts to Romo! Its not stats or his ability to run or his supporting cast. People just take a good look at his throwing ability. In his 3rd year in the league I have yet to see him make any wow throws regardless of if their caught or not. Dak is most efficient throwing the ball between the numbers and 10 yards down the field. He never throws the ball until he visually sees his guy open instead of throwing the ball while the WR is making his break. If Dak is not able to set his feet he really struggles to get anything on the ball. These are all things people can actually see while watching the game. This isnt as simple as saying Dak will get better. Yes Dak will once in a while make that throw to Gallup on the sidelines about 30 yds down field but he simply doesnt have the arm or accuracy to make the deeper throws with any consistency.

Or the stones

 

[G2]

Except in Dallas, with Bledsoe
Where he was on Pace for 870 yards.

TO was incredible player. Deserving Hall of Fame inductee.

He and Romo benefited greatly from playing together. However neither carried the other. They accomplished a lot together and apart as well

This whole thing started over a semantical discussion about what age a player is in his prime

at the end of the day I find it amazing that a Hall of Fame wide receiver who played with a lot of really good quarterbacks had the second best year of his illustrious career at age 34 playing with a first year starter

I think that says a lot about TO but it also says an awful lot about the guy slinging it. Since this is a thread devoted to comparison to the first 39 games for Romo/Prescott, people have offered the opinion that the comparison isn't valid because Romo had TO for two years "in his prime"

I tend to think that certainly helped Romo. But I also am convinced that if the situation were reversed no way TO puts up the same type numbers with Dak at age 34. And the excuse offered would be " well sure he had TO but he was past his prime"

Which is pretty much the same thing said with regards to Dez

No, Dez isn't TO. But he was the all time leading TD catcher in franchise history by age 27. At which point (we're told) he forgot how to play the game

End of the day Numbers will be twisted to excuse Prescott and diminish Romo. That's the entire point of this thread

If you played with Dak you were washed up at 27. If you played with Romo you were still at the top of your potential into your late 30's

The play of the quarterback had/has nothing to do with that. It's just the way it is.

So you agree Dez is TO, but then continue to compare them? Holy christ dude.
Owens WAS elite at his mid 30's and Braynt IS washed up. SO?


Owens at 35 is still elite, while Bryant at 27, 28, 29 or 30 is not. Get over it. Bryant hasn't played at a high level in over 4 seasons. And, he's not even playing so MAYBE HE'S NOT THAT GOOD ANYMORE!!!! IT HAPPENS!!!! He was a nightmare anyway.

I loved Romo and he connect on a high level with a handful of WRs, so what?
You can have the last word (and I know you will), this is stupid. have fun.