I'm on the Jon Kitna Bandwagon

[Arkyvarminter]

Weeden will start this week and will play much better than last week. Romo will be back in two weeks. End of thread

 

[KJJ]

KJJ I know what your trying to say and we just gonna have to agree to disagree.

I too have seen Vaughn play and he was much more accurate and had great footwork for someone his size. At this time Weeden should not be even considered after that horrendous performance. It probably won't be possible but if worst comes to worst, and all we need to do is have a reliable bus driver who can protect the ball and not throw INTs during crucial moments, I will hedge my bet on Vaughn over Weeden.

Let's just disagree and move on then. You saw Vaughn play in preseason against players battling for roster spots. I've seen a lot of young rookie QB's look good in that situation and struggle mightily when forced into action during the regular season. At this time Weeden has to be considered because he has experience and has been prepared all offseason and during the regular season to be the backup. The Cowboys aren't going to get back on track with a bus driver. The last QB you want protecting the ball and not throwing int's in critical situations is a young developmental QB who's never started an NFL game. Even Romo with all his experience has had issues protecting the ball during crucial moments.

He's thrown his share of int's in those situations but the Cowboys would have never been in position to win some of those games without him. Orton threw an int during a crucial moment vs Philly in week 17 last season but his experience gave the Cowboys a chance to win that game in the closing moments. It's not easy for any QB even the most experienced QB's to come through in crucial situations when their teams season is on the line. Vaughn would never be able to put the Cowboys in a position to win critical games vs good teams that are being led by experienced veteran QB's.

This is just another one of those situations where you have some who are living in the moment. After Weeden's 4 out of 6 performance and one TD vs Washington 2 weeks ago in relief of Romo there was a big love fest amongst a few fans over Weeden. After his poor performance on Sunday none of them can be found. After Weeden was signed there were those this past summer that thought he should be the Cowboys starter. lol It's like an evening at the improve with some of the comments made on this board. Time to give this topic a rest.

 

[gimmesix]

How can you disagree based on Vaughn's level of inexperience? You're basing everything on what you saw in preseason. You need to base your opinion on what we've been seeing with the team the past 3 weeks. The OL has struggled in pass protection. In Romo's last 2 games he was sacked 7 times and 5 of those sacks came vs Washington. He suffered an int and a fumble in those games due to the heavy pressure he was under. The lack of pass protection is the reason he was injured. As for the running game if you don't have an accurate passer who can efficiently throw the ball down the field defenses will stack up against the run we saw that on Sunday vs AZ. I know Vaughn would fail and fail BIG because of his lack of development and experience. Defenses would be licking their chops facing him.

No, you don't know that he would fail. It is conjecture.

I do know that Brandon Weeden is 5-16 as a starter, which means he wins once in every five games he plays. I cannot see how that makes him a better option than an inexperienced player who showed better levels of awareness, touch and poise than Weeden did in the preseason.

That doesn't mean I'd expect Vaughan to step in and suddenly look like the greatest QB find on the face of the earth. (He could, but it's absolutely fair to say there'd be no reason to expect it.) I just don't think inexperience or the lack thereof should have more to do with who's out there than who performed better, no matter the level of the competition faced.

 

[KJJ]

No, you don't know that he would fail. It is conjecture.

I do know that Brandon Weeden is 5-16 as a starter, which means he wins once in every five games he plays. I cannot see how that makes him a better option than an inexperienced player who showed better levels of awareness, touch and poise than Weeden did in the preseason.

That doesn't mean I'd expect Vaughan to step in and suddenly look like the greatest QB find on the face of the earth. (He could, but it's absolutely fair to say there'd be no reason to expect it.) I just don't think inexperience or the lack thereof should have more to do with who's out there than who performed better, no matter the level of the competition faced.

I know he would fail based on everything I pointed out. It's a waste of time continuing to argue this because like I keep saying Vaughn will never see the field this season unless Romo continues to be out and Weeden gets hurt. How can you possibly not see that a QB that has over 20 NFL starts with 5 wins isn't a better option than an undrafted developmental QB that's never taken a regular season snap? You continue to base your opinion of Vaughn on his play during preseason vs bubble players in the second half of games. lol Weeden faced better competition than Vaughn during preseason. There were FANS last season talking up Alex Tanney based on his preseason performance and a trick shot video he posted on YouTube that probably took him over 500 takes to complete.

One FAN proclaimed that Tanney was the Cowboys future franchise QB. Before Romo ever started a regular season game for the Cowboys he faced the starting lineup for the Seahawks in preseason in 06 and played extremely well. He received reps all preseason vs starting competition to prepare him to be Bledsoe's backup that season. It took 4 years of development for him to reach that level. No team in the league is going to start a rookie QB during the regular season without having them face starters in preseason.

A few weeks ago the Cowboys were considered by most as the best team in football and were on top of all the power polls and now they're taking on the look of a mediocre team once again. If they miss the playoffs after starting 6-1 the 2014 season will end up being one of the most disappointing seasons in years. The Cowboys are not about to try and salvage this season with an inexperienced developmental QB. We're not going to agree on this so it's time to move on.

 

[gimmesix]

I know he would fail based on everything I pointed out. It's a waste of time continuing to argue this because like I keep saying Vaughn will never see the field this season unless Romo continues to be out and Weeden gets hurt. How can you possibly not see that a QB that has over 20 NFL starts with 5 wins isn't a better option than an undrafted developmental QB that's never taken a regular season snap? You continue to base your opinion of Vaughn on his play during preseason vs bubble players in the second half of games. lol Weeden faced better competition than Vaughn during preseason. There were FANS last season talking up Alex Tanney based on his preseason performance and a trick shot video he posted on YouTube that probably took him over 500 takes to complete.

One FAN proclaimed that Tanney was the Cowboys future franchise QB. Before Romo ever started a regular season game for the Cowboys he faced the starting lineup for the Seahawks in preseason in 06 and played extremely well. He received reps all preseason vs starting competition to prepare him to be Bledsoe's backup that season. It took 4 years of development for him to reach that level. No team in the league is going to start a rookie QB during the regular season without having them face starters in preseason.

A few weeks ago the Cowboys were considered by most as the best team in football and were on top of all the power polls and now they're taking on the look of a mediocre team once again. If they miss the playoffs after starting 6-1 the 2014 season will end up being one of the most disappointing seasons in years. The Cowboys are not about to try and salvage this season with an inexperienced developmental QB. We're not going to agree on this so it's time to move on.

So move on.

No one here is claiming that Vaughan is the second coming of Romo, just that he played better than Weeden in the preseason (making good passes, decisions, etc., is still the same no matter what backups you're facing, since you're also playing with backups) and is at least as good an option as what we saw Monday, a quarterback who is every bit 5-16.

If we're going to lose with one, it might as well be the one who might have some kind of future in the league instead of the one who has proven he doesn't. That's all anyone is really saying. A player who has failed in 16 of 20 starts isn't automatically better than a player who hasn't been given the opportunity to fail.

This thread wasn't started with the idea of what Dallas is going to do. Of course, Dallas isn't going to do anything that's been suggested in this thread. It's been suggested because that's what some of us would prefer, whether it's Kitna (who I'm not interested in) or Vaughan, who I would much prefer watching than Weeden and have felt that way since the preseason ended.

 

[cowboys1981]

So move on.

No one here is claiming that Vaughan is the second coming of Romo, just that he played better than Weeden in the preseason (making good passes, decisions, etc., is still the same no matter what backups you're facing, since you're also playing with backups) and is at least as good an option as what we saw Monday, a quarterback who is every bit 5-16.

If we're going to lose with one, it might as well be the one who might have some kind of future in the league instead of the one who has proven he doesn't. That's all anyone is really saying. A player who has failed in 16 of 20 starts isn't automatically better than a player who hasn't been given the opportunity to fail.

This thread wasn't started with the idea of what Dallas is going to do. Of course, Dallas isn't going to do anything that's been suggested in this thread. It's been suggested because that's what some of us would prefer, whether it's Kitna (who I'm not interested in) or Vaughan, who I would much prefer watching than Weeden and have felt that way since the preseason ended.

One thing I can say about Vaughan is he showed some flashes without our starting Oine in front of him. At this point the game is too fast for him. Needs to develop.

As far as Weeden goes. He won't get away with staring down receivers vs Arizona who is also stopping the run on us.

If he starts like I'm projecting he'll get away with more than he did vs Arizona.

Not saying he's good, its just JAX is just that much worse.

 

[Dodger12]

My God.....look at us. We're debating the merits of Brandon Weeden. Brandon ******* Weeden. All day his name is stuck in my mind. I've been relegated to rooting for Brandon Weeden. I just can't believe it.

 

[gimmesix]

One thing I can say about Vaughan is he showed some flashes without our starting Oine in front of him. At this point the game is too fast for him. Needs to develop.

As far as Weeden goes. He won't get away with staring down receivers vs Arizona who is also stopping the run on us.

If he starts like I'm projecting he'll get away with more than he did vs Arizona.

Not saying he's good, its just JAX is just that much worse.

Last year, he was 24 of 40 for 370 yards with 3 TDs and 2 ints. in a 32-28 loss to Jacksonville. If we assume, we're better defensively than Cleveland was last year and running the ball, then it could be his 1 victory among 5 losses.

 

[KJJ]

So move on.

No one here is claiming that Vaughan is the second coming of Romo, just that he played better than Weeden in the preseason (making good passes, decisions, etc., is still the same no matter what backups you're facing, since you're also playing with backups) and is at least as good an option as what we saw Monday, a quarterback who is every bit 5-16.

If we're going to lose with one, it might as well be the one who might have some kind of future in the league instead of the one who has proven he doesn't. That's all anyone is really saying. A player who has failed in 16 of 20 starts isn't automatically better than a player who hasn't been given the opportunity to fail.

This thread wasn't started with the idea of what Dallas is going to do. Of course, Dallas isn't going to do anything that's been suggested in this thread. It's been suggested because that's what some of us would prefer, whether it's Kitna (who I'm not interested in) or Vaughan, who I would much prefer watching than Weeden and have felt that way since the preseason ended.

Hard to move on when you keep drawing me back in. It's obvious you just want to keep arguing despite not bringing anything of substance to the table. I keep trying to put a lid on this discussion but you keep coming back with more drivel to keep it going. Better fasten your seatbelt because here we go! You keep saying let's go with Vaughn and see what he's got. That's another typical armchair fan response. You sound exactly like reboot sure you and him aren't one in the same? lol You seem to be the only two that want to go with Vaughn. No team with 7 games left that's in serious playoff contention would throw an undrafted developmental rookie QB into the starting lineup just to see what they got. That's something teams do when their season is over and they're playing for next year. When you're in playoff contention and your starting QB goes down you play the QB who's won some games in the league and gives you the best chance to stay afloat.

You keep saying that Vaughn outplayed Weeden during preseason and that was never reported. The fact that Vaughn was named the 3rd string QB is proof he didn't outplay Weeden. In 2012 Seattle brought in Matt Flynn and paid him a lot of money to start but Russell Wilson a rookie 3rd round pick outplayed him in preseason and during training camp therefore he was named the starter. In Vaughn's first 2 preseason games playing mostly in the 4th quarter vs bubble players he was 10-21 and a TD. In the Cowboys first preseason game vs the Chargers Weeden was13 of 17 for 107 yards and a TD playing against better competition than Vaughn.

Granted Weeden's preseason performance was up and down but I heard no one who was covering the Cowboys claim Vaughn outplayed Weeden. All the camp reports had Weeden looking pretty solid in camp. What were you saying about Vaughn and Weeden during the summer? Can you provide an article claiming Vaughn outplayed Weeden in preseason and that he should be the backup? What were you saying about Weeden after his 4 out of 6 performance and one TD vs Washington on Monday Night? Were you calling for Vaughn to start?

You're just living in the moment of Weeden's poor performance on Sunday. Be honest you would take any young QB over Weeden at this moment. If the Cowboys still had Tanney you would be screaming for him. Funny how a 3rd string developmental QB looks so good after Weeden's performance on Sunday. If I have the time I may go back to some of your comments after the Monday Night game and see if you commented about Weeden. Wish the board had a search feature would like to see if I could find any of your opinions on Weeden and Vaughn during this past summer. I'm consistent I never thought Weeden could play and nothing I saw of Dustin Vaughn's preseason performances against scrubs had me overly impressed.

 

[KJJ]

Anyone on the old man Favre bandwagon? lol Haven't seen many who've aged worst than him. He was going gray in his 20's. Looking at him you would think his rookie year was in 71 not 91.

http://i465.***BLOCKED***/albums/rr16/KJJ100/images5_zps1eb48dd5.jpg

 

[gimmesix]

Hard to move on when you keep drawing me back in. It's obvious you just want to keep arguing despite not bringing anything of substance to the table. I keep trying to put a lid on this discussion but you keep coming back with more drivel to keep it going.

It's your choice to stay in. You keep posting your beliefs; I'll keep posting mine.

If Dallas had to play the final seven games without Romo, it would be much more senseless to start a QB who is 5-16 for his career and expect to contend for the playoffs than to play a QB with no experience. Either way, you're not likely to go anywhere but down, but at least you can get the inexperienced guy some experience rather than ride with the guy who has proven he can't drive. (Now, bringing in a different backup creates a different argument ... but not Kitna.)

Winning 5 games out of 21 does not prove you can win in this league. It proves you have less than a 20 percent chance of winning in this league.

And yes, Vaughan outplayed Weeden in the preseason. I think that was pretty obvious to those who paid any attention to the backup QBs. It wasn't just about the numbers. It was about awareness, which Weeden showed he didn't have. Vaughan is the third-string QB because Dallas brought in Weeden to give it an experienced backup because it has shown time and time again that it values experience, even when it is overvaluing it. Weeden had moments in the preseason, but overall he showed the exact same things we saw against Arizona, which are the same things that caused Cleveland to give up on him despite spending a first-round pick on him.

If you want to know how I felt about Weeden after the Washington game, I thought this isn't the same QB I saw in the preseason. I was wary that we'd see that guy rear his ugly head again, and he did. I wasn't calling for Vaughan to start, but I certainly was expecting us to lose.

If you want to know if I've been consistent on this subject, google Keep Vaughn, dump Weeden (yes, I misspelled Vaughan). I started that thread on this site Aug. 28 stating this exact same opinion.

 

[KJJ]

It's your choice to stay in. You keep posting your beliefs; I'll keep posting mine.

If Dallas had to play the final seven games without Romo, it would be much more senseless to start a QB who is 5-16 for his career and expect to contend for the playoffs than to play a QB with no experience. Either way, you're not likely to go anywhere but down, but at least you can get the inexperienced guy some experience rather than ride with the guy who has proven he can't drive. (Now, bringing in a different backup creates a different argument ... but not Kitna.)

Winning 5 games out of 21 does not prove you can win in this league. It proves you have less than a 20 percent chance of winning in this league.

And yes, Vaughan outplayed Weeden in the preseason. I think that was pretty obvious to those who paid any attention to the backup QBs. It wasn't just about the numbers. It was about awareness, which Weeden showed he didn't have. Vaughan is the third-string QB because Dallas brought in Weeden to give it an experienced backup because it has shown time and time again that it values experience, even when it is overvaluing it. Weeden had moments in the preseason, but overall he showed the exact same things we saw against Arizona, which are the same things that caused Cleveland to give up on him despite spending a first-round pick on him.

If you want to know how I felt about Weeden after the Washington game, I thought this isn't the same QB I saw in the preseason. I was wary that we'd see that guy rear his ugly head again, and he did. I wasn't calling for Vaughan to start, but I certainly was expecting us to lose.

If you want to know if I've been consistent on this subject, google Keep Vaughn, dump Weeden (yes, I misspelled Vaughan). I started that thread on this site Aug. 28 stating this exact same opinion.

No one who knows football would share your beliefs. You're saying it's much more senseless to play a QB who's 5-16 as a starter while in playoff contention than to play a developmental QB who has no experience. LOL That says everything anyone needs to know about your insight into the game. A lot of Cowboy fans wanted to dump Weeden in favor of Vaughn this summer because most didn't like Weeden and figured it would save the Cowboys some money. It was more of a testament to their displeasure in Weeden than it was that Vaughn looked good. Weeden was mostly being judged by how he performed in Cleveland. Hard to put much stock in Vaughn who no team bothered to draft and who's only action in preseason was vs bubble players.

There's only been a handful of undrafted free agent QB's in the 94 year history of the NFL that became viable NFL QB's. You had Moon, Warner, Zorn, Delhomme, Kapp and Romo just off the top of my head. None of those QB's stepped in as rookies and led their teams to the playoffs. It took a few years and a few teams for some of them before they became starting QB's. Vaughn faces some very long odds and if he beats them and does become a viable NFL QB it's going to take years of development. You can continue to argue about something you're never going to find out about this season because Vaughn will never see the field unless it's due to injury, the Cowboys being blown out or their season is over.

 

[KJJ]

If you want to know if I've been consistent on this subject, google Keep Vaughn, dump Weeden (yes, I misspelled Vaughan). I started that thread on this site Aug. 28 stating this exact same opinion.

Just went through all 4 pages of that thread and you were consistent. No one was more impressed with Vaughan than you but most were saying what I've been saying that he doesn't have the experience to win games. The majority that wanted to go with Vaughan over Weeden assumed the Cowboys wouldn't be a very good team this season. The Cowboys had just come off an 0-4 preseason when you started that thread. One fan said he wanted to go with Vaughan because the Cowboys won't be contending anyway.

Another fan said pretty much the same thing that if Vaughan has to play the Cowboys will end up with a high draft pick. Most everyone thought the Cowboys weren't going to contend and would rather lose with Vaughan than Weeden. Not one poster thought the Cowboys could win with Vaughan if Romo went down but thinking the team wouldn't be very competitive most didn't feel it would matter if he had to play. One fan said he wasn't impressed with Weeden or Vaughan.

It was obvious from reading the thread that Vaughan didn't play well in the final preseason game. A couple of fans pointed to his poor reads and accuracy issues and this was against players fighting for roster spots in the final preseason game. You should start the same thread and see what everyone's current opinion is now that the Cowboys are in contention. I can't imagine they'll be many who would want to go with Vaughan with the Cowboys in playoff contention if Romo remains out.

 

[gimmesix]

No one who knows football would share your beliefs. You're saying it's much more senseless to play a QB who's 5-16 as a starter while in playoff contention than to play a developmental QB who has no experience. LOL That says everything anyone needs to know about your insight into the game. A lot of Cowboy fans wanted to dump Weeden in favor of Vaughn this summer because most didn't like Weeden and figured it would save the Cowboys some money. It was more of a testament to their displeasure in Weeden than it was that Vaughn looked good. Weeden was mostly being judged by how he performed in Cleveland. Hard to put much stock in Vaughn who no team bothered to draft and who's only action in preseason was vs bubble players.

There's only been a handful of undrafted free agent QB's in the 94 year history of the NFL that became viable NFL QB's. You had Moon, Warner, Zorn, Delhomme, Kapp and Romo just off the top of my head. None of those QB's stepped in as rookies and led their teams to the playoffs. It took a few years and a few teams for some of them before they became starting QB's. Vaughn faces some very long odds and if he beats them and does become a viable NFL QB it's going to take years of development. You can continue to argue about something you're never going to find out about this season because Vaughn will never see the field unless it's due to injury, the Cowboys being blown out or their season is over.

Then why are you arguing. I'm simply stating my belief that I'd rather have Vaughan in there probably losing than Weeden probably losing.

Now that I proved you wrong about the fact that I supported the idea of Vaughan being the backup over Weeden at the end of the preseason, you're trying to play the ol' switcheroo of well, a lot of people wanted that because of Weeden's play, not anything that Vaughan did.

That thread I pointed you to showed that I both didn't care for Weeden's play and also thought Vaughan played better. I don't put stock in players who don't show me that they have something, and Vaughan has something no matter if he was a player no team bothered to draft and who's only action in preseason was vs bubble players. There are a lot of players who slip through the cracks only to succeed, and our team should know that better than just about anyone.

That doesn't mean I would expect Vaughan to step in and look like an old pro. But there is the possibility that he could go 1-5 as easily as Weeden could. And Weeden, again, has proven that is who he is.

The thing you keep ignoring is that Weeden is so bad that putting anyone out there would get us the same result: Mostly losses and no playoffs. No one is making promises of grandeur with Vaughan, but the desire to see him play if Romo was lost for the season is far more realistic than the hope you hold on to that Weeden could someone get Dallas to the playoffs in Romo's absence.

If that's not your expectation, then there is no premise that is reasonable for continuing to play Weeden in that, unless you think Dallas can develop a player who has clearly shown he is what he is. If that's the case, then it says everything anyone needs to know about your insight into the game.

 

[gimmesix]

Just went through all 4 pages of that thread and you were consistent. No one was more impressed with Vaughan than you but most were saying what I've been saying that he doesn't have the experience to win games. The majority that wanted to go with Vaughan over Weeden assumed the Cowboys wouldn't be a very good team this season. The Cowboys had just come off an 0-4 preseason when you started that thread. One fan said he wanted to go with Vaughan because the Cowboys won't be contending anyway.

Another fan said pretty much the same thing that if Vaughan has to play the Cowboys will end up with a high draft pick. Most everyone thought the Cowboys weren't going to contend and would rather lose with Vaughan than Weeden. Not one poster thought the Cowboys could win with Vaughan if Romo went down but thinking the team wouldn't be very competitive most didn't feel it would matter if he had to play. One fan said he wasn't impressed with Weeden or Vaughan.

It was obvious from reading the thread that Vaughan didn't play well in the final preseason game. A couple of fans pointed to his poor reads and accuracy issues and this was against players fighting for roster spots in the final preseason game. You should start the same thread and see what everyone's current opinion is now that the Cowboys are in contention. I can't imagine they'll be many who would want to go with Vaughan with the Cowboys in playoff contention if Romo remains out.

I do agree that Vaughan didn't play as well in the final preseason game. He was under constant duress and it showed in his play.

I also have consistently said in this thread that I wouldn't expect Dallas to win much, if at all, if it played Vaughan. (I do think it would be good experience for him and would allow us to see if he really is worth developing.) But I've also consistently said that I wouldn't expect Dallas to win much if it played Weeden, certainly not enough to make the playoffs.

This is my only contention. If Romo were to miss the remainder of the season, the season is over for Dallas. If the season is over, there is absolutely no reason to play Weeden over Vaughan. If you think we should play Weeden because we still have a shot at the playoffs, you're delusional.

 

[KJJ]

Then why are you arguing. I'm simply stating my belief that I'd rather have Vaughan in there probably losing than Weeden probably losing.

Now that I proved you wrong about the fact that I supported the idea of Vaughan being the backup over Weeden at the end of the preseason, you're trying to play the ol' switcheroo of well, a lot of people wanted that because of Weeden's play, not anything that Vaughan did.

That thread I pointed you to showed that I both didn't care for Weeden's play and also thought Vaughan played better. I don't put stock in players who don't show me that they have something, and Vaughan has something no matter if he was a player no team bothered to draft and who's only action in preseason was vs bubble players. There are a lot of players who slip through the cracks only to succeed, and our team should know that better than just about anyone.

That doesn't mean I would expect Vaughan to step in and look like an old pro. But there is the possibility that he could go 1-5 as easily as Weeden could. And Weeden, again, has proven that is who he is.

The thing you keep ignoring is that Weeden is so bad that putting anyone out there would get us the same result: Mostly losses and no playoffs. No one is making promises of grandeur with Vaughan, but the desire to see him play if Romo was lost for the season is far more realistic than the hope you hold on to that Weeden could someone get Dallas to the playoffs in Romo's absence.

If that's not your expectation, then there is no premise that is reasonable for continuing to play Weeden in that, unless you think Dallas can develop a player who has clearly shown he is what he is. If that's the case, then it says everything anyone needs to know about your insight into the game.

We're both arguing because you refuse to let this go. I tried yesterday to put an end to this but you keep hammering away. Nothing is going to change our opinion can't you see that? Us repeating ourselves over and over isn't going to change anything but the time we're wasting on the clock. I've given every valid reason for why starting Vaughan would be ridiculous with the Cowboys in playoff contention. I'm not ignoring that Weeden is bad but he has enough experience that he might be able to bounce back and play a better game. That's all we can bank on if Romo continues to be out.

It's not like that was his 2nd or 3rd straight bad game this season so screaming for Vaughan after one bad week is nothing more than a knee jerk reaction. Weeden's career is probably on the line because if he continues to stink with the talent the Cowboys have on offense no team will trust him as their backup. He had some excuses for his poor play in Cleveland but not in Dallas. He'll be 32 next season so if he's given another opportunity vs JAX it may be his last one.

 

[KJJ]

This is my only contention. If Romo were to miss the remainder of the season, the season is over for Dallas. If the season is over, there is absolutely no reason to play Weeden over Vaughan.

That's not what you've been saying or we wouldn't be arguing. lol We've been arguing because you want to start Vaughan NOW while the Cowboys are in playoff contention. If Romo were to miss the remainder of the season, the season would be over for the Cowboys. In that event I would have no issue starting Vaughan over Weeden.

 

[KJJ]

If you think we should play Weeden because we still have a shot at the playoffs, you're delusional.

It would only be delusional if Romo were healthy to play. lol There isn't anything delusional about wanting to start an experienced QB who was signed and prepared to be the backup in the event Romo was injured over an undrafted free agent rookie developmental QB who's never taken a single regular season NFL snap. Last year some wanted to dump Orton prior to the season and go with Tanney.

Had the Cowboys done that Philly would have won going away in week 17. Every year we go through this with young QB's the Cowboys bring in. They always look like the next great thing to all the armchair football fans. lol If you go through the years you can get some pretty good laughs at the young QB's the Cowboys signed who some posters touted as the next great QB.

 

[gimmesix]

That's not what you've been saying or we wouldn't be arguing. lol We've been arguing because you want to start Vaughan NOW while the Cowboys are in playoff contention. If Romo were to miss the remainder of the season, the season would be over for the Cowboys. In that event I would have no issue starting Vaughan over Weeden.

If we were to be without Romo, then we would not be in playoff contention, no matter what our record is now.

I don't want to start Vaughan over Romo, only rather than Weeden. In fact, I'll give you this: If Romo is out Sunday, I'd probably start Weeden because Jacksonville is 1-8 and Weeden has played OK against them previously. After that, if Romo stayed out, I'd start Vaughan even if we were 7-3 (or bring in a better backup) because I can't see Weeden going more than 1-5 or 2-4 in the final six games.

It appears you would wait, holding out hope that this team could go at least 3-3 with Weeden, but I cannot see that happening. There is no proof in his history that he can do it and there's been no proof in what I've seen of him as a QB.

There's no proof with Vaughan, either, obviously, but again, it would be about getting him experience (although I would be hoping for more than that ... just like I would if Weeden started).

 

[gimmesix]

It would only be delusional if Romo were healthy to play. lol There isn't anything delusional about wanting to start an experienced QB who was signed and prepared to be the backup in the event Romo was injured over an undrafted free agent rookie developmental QB who's never taken a single regular season NFL snap. Last year some wanted to dump Orton prior to the season and go with Tanney.

Had the Cowboys done that Philly would have won going away in week 17. Every year we go through this with young QB's the Cowboys bring in. They always look like the next great thing to all the armchair football fans. lol If you go through the years you can get some pretty good laughs at the young QB's the Cowboys signed who some posters touted as the next great QB.

Philly won anyway, so I think you're kind of making my point for me. Although I will say, I thought there was a .500 chance that we'd win with Orton because that's what his play and career have shown (which is why I would not have gone with Tanney). Again, our chances of winning with Weeden are only .200.

And again, I will say I believe it's delusional if anyone thinks Weeden can suddenly play better than that when he has not shown any signs that he's more than a .200 QB. No one here is promising that Vaughan is going to be any better than that, but it really wouldn't matter.