Just a What If. 2016

[Blackspider214]

Good lord let it go. This is embarrassing. The love affair this fanbase has for a QB who never won anything in his life is beyond me. Romo for this fanbase is the king of hypothetical. He never actually won anything but fans love placing him in these scenarios that never happened to prop him up.

How in the world would Romo have played better in that Packers playoff game than Dak did. Just stop.

 

[DFWJC]

Past is the past.
Other than the one turnover, Dak played well vs Green Bay anyway.
I realize the 15 point lead allowed GB to play a bit looser on D to prevent a long TD, so a lot of those passing yards came a bit easier.
In any case, Dak was not why Dallas lost. We lost a much easier to win HOME playoff game (vs at frozen Lambeau) because the defense didn't hold up.

Old news

 

[McKDaddy]

Did anybody really think this rookie QB was going to be the first rook in NFL history to win a SB, especially without a dominating defense?

It's just bad gambling when you take those kind of odds. SB with a vet is difficult. With a rook, worse than Mega Millions odds.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Hey buddy

See I didn’t call you any names this time, because I thought you might be listening. My olive branch...

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

What if bob kraft paid his due ...?

 

[birdwells1]

If it's in Dallas then it wouldn't be in GB would it, which is what I was referring too. Beating GB in GB.

2008

Maybe you can see it in bold.

 

[HungryLion]

You wanna know what I wonder about more from that 2016 season? More than what would have happened if Romo was starting?

I wonder about how on gods green earth, Aaron Rodgers didn’t fumble that football on the final drive when Jeff Heath clobbered him from the blind side.

Rodgers has one hand on the football and for absolutely drilled. Somehow he managed to hold onto that ball. Next play he drives the dagger through all of our hearts.

That eats me up more than whether Romo should have played or not.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I am wanting the opinions of the fans here on this. I know the season is coming, and what if is a stupid game. But I have changed my opinion about a piece of history in 2016 and wish to see if I am alone.

So,

What if:

In the last game against the Eagles in regular season what would the results have been if Jerry stepped in and advised Dak he has a future, but this is Tony's team, win, lose, or draw for the rest of this season.

1. Would the team (players) have accepted that?

2. They were already going to the play-offs. How would they have fared with a healthy Romo dropping dimes on his receivers and Zeke tearing the league a new rear end?

I was in favor of keeping Dak under center. You don't break a streak.

But upon reflection, I can't help thinking, Tony, knowing this was his swan song, and his ability to recognize the defenses and exploit them, he would have gotten the team - past those butt ugly Packers - to the NFC Championship game and taken the Cowboys to the Super Bowl.

I just see this moment in time, where the stars aligned, and Jones and The Red Headed cheerleader made the wrong move.

I think Tony would have handed the Patriots their butt in the first half, and then dissected them in the second to win it all.

Opinions?

I wanted Tony Romo to take over in the middle of the season. there is a reason no rookie QB ever has made the superbowl. to think we would do it with a rookie 4th round pick was stupid. Romo gave us the best chance for that season. we knew we had a QB, that we could develop at that point, so even if Romo played and got hurt again, then you just go back to Dak. But I didn't think Dak could get us to the superbowl. Post season is very different than regular season.

 

[CowboysRule]

I think it's hilarious how every talks about how Romo couldn't make it through a game. Do you remember his last injury? He didn't just get tackled in a normal fashion. He was going into a seated position with a rather large man on top of him putting all the pressure into his spine. I can't recall anyone else being tackled like that. Also, if you hadn't noticed (which I'm sure you have), it's now a penalty to land with your weight on the QB because it has a tendency to cause injury.

Romo was the better QB at the time than Dak. That's not taking anything away from Dak, Romo was on another level. It's like our C position last year. Looney played well, but Frederick is just that good. I don't know if we win the SB if Romo starts but I think we get past the Packers.

 

[Jake]

Atlanta had that in basically the first quarter the following week. That Packer defense was abysmal.

Dak took three quarters to get going. The game should have been over early because Dallas was a substantially better team than Green Bay.

I noticed you cut out this part of my post: No Cowboys QB has ever won a playoff game when the opponent scored 30 or more points - not Meredith, not Staubach, not Aikman, not Romo, not Dak.

There are plenty of real reasons to criticize Jerry, JG, and even Dak. I don't need made up ones like Romo magically overcoming the Cowboys own defense by putting up 40 on the Packers and Patriots to win a Super Bowl.

 

[HungryLion]

Atlanta had that in basically the first quarter the following week. That Packer defense was abysmal.

Dak took three quarters to get going. The game should have been over early because Dallas was a substantially better team than Green Bay.

Let’s ignore the fact that the Falcons defense only allowed 21 points to the Packers.

They allowed ZERO points. To the Packers in the first half. Zero.

All of the Packers touchdowns came after the Falcons had a substantial lead.

But yeah. The Falcons only won because of their offense. It’s not a team game.

 

[HungryLion]

I noticed you cut out this part of my post: No Cowboys QB has ever won a playoff game when the opponent scored 30 or more points - not Meredith, not Staubach, not Aikman, not Romo, not Dak.

There are plenty of real reasons to criticize Jerry, JG, and even Dak. I don't need made up ones like Romo magically overcoming the Cowboys own defense by putting up 40 on the Packers and Patriots to win a Super Bowl.

He would rather choose to ignore the fact that the Falcons defense only allowed 21 points to the Packers. And literally shut them out the entire first half. The Packers scores all came after the game was essentially over and the falcons had a substantial lead.

Nah, the Falcons only won because of their offense.....

 

[Future]

He would rather choose to ignore the fact that the Falcons defense only allowed 21 points to the Packers. And literally shut them out the entire first half. The Packers scores all came after the game was essentially over and the falcons had a substantial lead.

Nah, the Falcons only won because of their offense.....

You could say the same thing about the Cowboys game. Dallas' first 3 drives went a total of 68 yards and got only 3 points. Nobody's giving the Packers' defense any credit....
.

 

[CouchCoach]

You could say the same thing about the Cowboys game. Dallas' first 3 drives went a total of 68 yards and got only 3 points. Nobody's giving the Packers' defense any credit....
.

Nobody gave their team credit for coming into enemy territory better prepared than the home team and hitting them in the mouth three times before they knew what hit them.

Give this HC a bye in the playoffs is the best advantage the other team has.

 

[Jake]

What if Romo doesn't fumble the snap at Seattle...what if Crayton doesn't stop his route against the Giants...what if Murray doesn't fumble at Green Bay...what if Rodgers doesn't make that pass to Cook - we can play this game all day. Champions make plays while teams who come up short play "what if" games.

The 2013 Cowboys averaged 27 points per game (5th best) yet went 8-8 and missed the playoffs. Why? Because the defense was a hot mess, allowing 27 points per game (6th worst). It's the same story time and again this century - defense is usually a bigger problem than the offense, yet most of the complaining is about offense.

Dallas has won 2 division titles since Dak came into the league. They've lost 2 playoff games with the defense giving up 30+ in both of them. Stop expecting the offense to just outscore whatever garbage our defense puts out there, and let Romo fade into history. He wasn't going to do something in 2016 that he'd never done his entire career.

 

[DallasEast]

Correct. They lost the playoff game because the defense couldn’t stop Aaron Rodgers and the Packers when it mattered. Had Tony played (and survived for the whole game), it would’ve simply been 2014 all over again.

For the 2016 playoff game to have been the 2014 playoff game all over again, you would have needed:

1. Elliott to fumble and lead to points for Green Bay (e.g. Murray 2014 playoff game).
2. Bryant to catch/not catch/<expletive> Blandino (e.g. Bryant 2014 playoff game) and subtract a likely six or seven points for Dallas.

Additionally

3. Prescott not throw an interception deep in Packer territory (e.g. something Romo did not do in the 2014 playoff game) and subtract three, six, or possible seven points on an earlier drive.

Every game is different. It could be Green Bay could have blown out Dallas in the 2016 playoff if certain game day conditions had been met. Likewise, Dallas could have blown out Green Bay if certain events had occurred.

However, using Romo as the only variable while comparing each respective playoff game does not logically work. In fact, it is arguable that it works more against Prescott and lessens the responsibility of the defense's actual failure during that specific game.

 

[erod]

I noticed you cut out this part of my post: No Cowboys QB has ever won a playoff game when the opponent scored 30 or more points - not Meredith, not Staubach, not Aikman, not Romo, not Dak.

There are plenty of real reasons to criticize Jerry, JG, and even Dak. I don't need made up ones like Romo magically overcoming the Cowboys own defense by putting up 40 on the Packers and Patriots to win a Super Bowl.

Dallas only scored one touchdown that day through three quarters. That same Packers team was down 31-0 the next week after barely a half.

Romo sliced bad defenses to shreds, and he would have had that game done early. That wasn't a typical Green Bay team.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Romo got hurt in week 2 of 2015. The second game he tried to come back, he got hurt again. The first preseason game he tried to play in 2016, he got hurt again.

Romo was done for; he couldn't even consistently finish an NFL game at that point.

 

[erod]

Let’s ignore the fact that the Falcons defense only allowed 21 points to the Packers.

They allowed ZERO points. To the Packers in the first half. Zero.

All of the Packers touchdowns came after the Falcons had a substantial lead.

But yeah. The Falcons only won because of their offense. It’s not a team game.

Huh? You're arguing my point.

Atlanta was up, 31-0, a couple of minutes into the second half. Their defense was just atrocious. Dallas couldn't score much despite lots of yards until very late in the game. It should have been long over by then, and Romo would have capped those drives with his experience and ability.

Now, I don't think Dallas rolls into Atlanta and wins the next week because that was the best team in the NFL that year. But they would have had a scorer's chance.

And Dak would have benefited from watching it unfold.

 

[HungryLion]

You could say the same thing about the Cowboys game. Dallas' first 3 drives went a total of 68 yards and got only 3 points. Nobody's giving the Packers' defense any credit....
.

Sure you can. But that proves the point. You can’t just point to the QB and say he is the reason we lost to the Packers. That’s just nonsense.