How great was Romo?

[Diehardblues]

I think we’re in a similar conundrum as we were in 2006 needing a better QB to spark us.

 

[WillieBeamen]

Or we're 0-3 because he went down on the first series of the Carolina game. Or we're 2-1 like we were in 2014 after losing the opening game at home against a vastly inferior SF team and then having to come back from a 21-0 deficit in St. Louis fueled in part by a pick 6 thrown by Tony.

Look, I loved Tony. I sat at Texas Stadium and was awed by him turning a 20 yard loss due to a bad snap into a 10 yard gain and a first down. But this elevation of Tony to God-like stature is ridiculous. He was a part of any successes and any failures. As Parcells said, you are what your record says you are.

You missed the point


No one is talking about the current 38 year old Romo.

 

[Established1971]

Tony provided some fond memories. Here's one we'll never forget:

you know Seattle doctored the ball and an NFL rule change was placed to prevent teams from doing that again, right?

 

[Aviano90]

and a few byes, because bypassing the first round is the same as a win

Great point. 2 Wild Card wins and 1 bye week.

 

[Diehardblues]

Dak had an opportunity to surpass Romo’s post season lack of success in his debut appearance.

Now we aren’t sure if he’ll get another shot?

 

[G2]

Great point. 2 Wild Card wins and 1 bye week.

Does the bye count as a win on the boards?

 

[JustChip]

One thing Romo wasn’t apart of was an anemic offense.

We are the 30th ranked offense with the leading rusher in the league.

And that's true, but the only thing that ensures is entertainment, not results.

 

[Diehardblues]

And that's true, but the only thing that ensures is entertainment, not results.

are you comfortable and entertained with Daks performance?

And you like these results more?

 

[JustChip]

You missed the point


No one is talking about the current 38 year old Romo.

Maybe I made a leap, but you said we'd be 3-0 with Romo and, unless I am remembering incorrectly (which is possible, maybe even likely), you've been a staunch critic of Dak and the team should've gone back to Romo.

But, if you're point is that the team would be 3-0 with a 2007-2009 Tony Romo, maybe. That's simply conjecture which everyone is entitled to.

 

[Diehardblues]

Maybe I made a leap, but you said we'd be 3-0 with Romo and, unless I am remembering incorrectly (which is possible, maybe even likely), you've been a staunch critic of Dak and the team should've gone back to Romo.

But, if you're point is that the team would be 3-0 with a 2007-2009 Tony Romo, maybe. That's simply conjecture which everyone is entitled to.

If your wanting to make subjective assumptions , do you think this offense would be more effective with a more talented prolific passer. Like Wentz, Goff , Darnold or Mahomes for example.

 

[Aviano90]

Does the bye count as a win on the boards?

I'll give it to him, I don't want to be petty. We did technically make it to the 2nd round of the playoffs. That said, all other QBs should get credit too when they had a bye week.

 

[JustChip]

are you comfortable with Daks performance?

You believe from what you’ve seen he’s enough to take us to the next level?

And you like these results more?

No, I'm not satisfied with Dak. In fact, I am very disappointed in him so far this year.

I don't know whether he can take us to the next level. I didn't know after 2016 nor did I know after 2017. I've been consistent in saying there's been reasons to be optimistic and reasons to be pessimistic. We are hitched to him this year and this year will determine the future.

No, I do not like these results. I would prefer 3-0, but it is only 3 games. Remember, the Giants were 0-2 or 0-3 in 2007 and there were significant rumblings Tom Coughlin had to be fired. What did they do - they went on to win the SB. Let's see how the next few games go before going all William Tecumseh Sherman.

 

[aikemirv]

Let me start by saying in 2016 they had no choice but to leave the rookie in there who was tearing it up over the increasingly brittle vet Romo. It was just time to move on.

Now on to 9. For years I would argue with Giants fans here in NJ, when they would say he stinks he couldn’t get that team to the playoffs, I would say He just carried a completely coachless, moderatly talented team that should have been 4-12 to an 8-8 season and a completely vanilla offense to 28pts per game or more. Not only was he changing every play but he was moving around in the pocket like a ninja to create time for receivers to get open. I really wish Jerry wasn’t such a selfish dbag and didn’t chase Parcells out of town with JO/TO. That team was ripe to dominate but you turned the keys over to fun Uncle Wade and now your nerdy adapted son because they make Jerry feel good. Now we see Romo’s creativity in the booth. He’s still the man. I still believe in Dak but he can’t do it alone as Tony did for so many years.

History will tell that not putting Romo back in the lineup in 2016 was the wrong move and the wrong choice. Dak would have taken the first 8 games as a huge positive and would have had a lot more time to learn from Romo and would have had a chance. Dez would still be here and the Cowboys would not have gotten rid of one of there most dynamic players. Also, it is possible that Dak would have garnered a great trade based on those first 8 games if that had been our choice.

No we just have s sucky QB with no options!

 

[Aviano90]

you know Seattle doctored the ball and an NFL rule change was placed to prevent teams from doing that again, right?

They didn't doctor the ball. They inserted a new ball. Inserting a new ball shouldn't have prevented Romo from putting the snap down (he caught it just fine). Yes, they changed the rule, but it doesn't mean Romo shouldn't have still executed the play.

 

[Diehardblues]

No, I'm not satisfied with Dak. In fact, I am very disappointed in him so far this year.

I don't know whether he can take us to the next level. I didn't know after 2016 nor did I know after 2017. I've been consistent in saying there's been reasons to be optimistic and reasons to be pessimistic. We are hitched to him this year and this year will determine the future.

No, I do not like these results. I would prefer 3-0, but it is only 3 games. Remember, the Giants were 0-2 or 0-3 in 2007 and there were significant rumblings Tom Coughlin had to be fired. What did they do - they went on to win the SB. Let's see how the next few games go before going all William Tecumseh Sherman.

So , you believe this team can still contend for the Super Bowl?

 

[JustChip]

If your wanting to make subjective assumptions , do you think this offense would be more effective with a more talented prolific passer. Like Wentz, Goff , Darnold or Mahomes for example.

I'm not making assumptions - I simply stated fact. The assumption was that they would be 3-0 with a different QB. That is a total assumption.

Yes, the offense would probably be more effective. But again, that's an assumption, not fact because everything is inter-related. Is it the play-calling? Is it the QB? Is it both? Is it the O line.

The best comparison is if Tony and Eli were reversed, would Tony have won a SB with the Giants and Eli not here. I think so, but there's no way to know or prove.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

Great enough to lead a perennial 0-16 pile of sht to winning %. Fans got what they deserve now. I love it!

We're getting exactly now what we got with him. Nothing. The only difference was that Romo was exciting to watch. Doesn't change the fact that he won nothing while he was here.

 

[Aviano90]

History will tell that not putting Romo back in the lineup in 2016 was the wrong move and the wrong choice. Dak would have taken the first 8 games as a huge positive and would have had a lot more time to learn from Romo and would have had a chance. Dez would still be here and the Cowboys would not have gotten rid of one of there most dynamic players. Also, it is possible that Dak would have garnered a great trade based on those first 8 games if that had been our choice.

No we just have s sucky QB with no options!

No, history will not tell that. It doesn't matter if Dak becomes the worst QB in the history of the league. It won't change the fact he played a great game that day and there is no guarantee Romo would have done better. History does show the offense typically didn't perform well in elimination games under Romo and many fans blame the defense for Romo's shortcomings. Yet, in a game our defense was torched, QB seems to be the focal point of the loss. I find that funny since Romo fans spend a large portion of their time blaming others (especially the defense) for Romo not having more success.

Dak did throw a bad interception that day and deserves a portion of the blame.

Romo took 3 bad sacks in 2014 GB playoff game and fumbled a snap on a 3rd and short late in the 1st half which stalled our drive where we could have entered halftime up 21-7. But Murray, Bailey, the defense, and the refs are the only people blamed. The Packers were also stacking the box and Romo wasn't throwing deep until the 4th and short. Does that sound familiar?

 

[Aviano90]

The only difference was that Romo was exciting to watch.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

No, history will not tell that. It doesn't matter if Dak becomes the worst QB in the history of the league. It won't change the fact he played a great game that day and there is no guarantee Romo would have done better. History does show the offense typically didn't perform well in elimination games under Romo and many fans blame the defense for Romo's shortcomings. Yet, in a game our defense was torched, QB seems to be the focal point of the loss. I find that funny since Romo fans spend a large portion of their time blaming others (especially the defense) for Romo not having more success.

Dak did throw a bad interception that day and deserves a portion of the blame.

Romo took 3 bad sacks in 2014 GB playoff game and fumbled a snap on a 3rd and short late in the 1st half which stalled our drive where we could have entered halftime up 21-7. But Murray, Bailey, the defense, and the refs are the only people blamed. The Packers were also stacking the box and Romo wasn't throwing deep until the 4th and short. Does that sound familiar?

It's always everybody elses fault.