Looking back: Was it a mistake not to go back to Romo

[khiladi]

NY had a battered secondary and receivers were open.

Not sure why they let go of Dez. Glad they did though.

yeah, I’m sure their SB defensive winning pass rush and “battered” secondary that stopped the undefeated Patriots making life miserable for Brady were like those 2016 Packers...

or the undefeated Packers in 2014 at home in sub freezing temperatures like the 2016 Packers..

Or Linehan was worse than Garrett as an OC and play caller..

 

[ItzKelz]

I wonder how things would have played out in 2016 if Romo got his job back once he became healthy.

Perhaps he could have taken the team all the way to the Superbowl like he almost did in 2014.

Perhaps Romo could have played one more season and Dak would only have 2018 and 2019 as being a starter for this team. His value would most likely be worth less because 2017 was a down year for Dak.

Perhaps he could've got re-injured and Dak would've stepped back in only further proving Romo's durability issues.

But to this day I still think Garrett and Jones did Romo dirty by not giving him his starting job back.

Jason Garrett.....*shivers*

Romo would have gotten hurt on the first drive and Dak would have took us to the SB due to teams not being prepared.....see She-agles

 

[Aviano90]

Team, I’m sure their defensive winning pass rush and battered secondary that stopped the undefeated Patriots were like those 2016 Packers...

Excuses. We scored 17 points on our 1st 4 possessions after torching this defense in the first 2 games. Then the Giants shut the Cowboys down with the aid of poor play by the Cowboys, including Romo. What the Giants went on to do against the Patriots is irrelevant. It didn't impact Crayton dropping a pass or stopping on a route, or Romo getting a grounding penalty, taking back sacks, or missing open receivers.

But you guys love to point blame on Dak while excusing Romo. Is it too hard to take a consistent approach? Why won't you go to bat for Dak at all?

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Those defenses weren’t letting up over 400 yards a game and playing with battered defensive backs off the street like GB in 2016. Nor did Dak have Jason Garrett calling plays and keeping him out of game planning meetings.

Dallas also got rid of Dez, the guy that caught 9 passes in that same 2016 game for 134 plus yards. Why did they get rid of him?

Dak was terrible all game long against GB. He made multiple crucial mistakes, brought nothing extraordinary to the game (meanwhile Rodgers completed about a half dozen throws that Dak couldn't even attempt). The overwhelming majority of plays made by Dak, when he wasn't performing one of his 14 incompletions, were when he was standing all by himself in a pocket throwing to wide open guys. He brought nothing to the game that a JUGGS machine on wheels couldn't have brought.
Here's a funny one for ya, Dak slobberers love "QBR" (even though they can barely spell it, much less tell you how it works)... Dak had a lower QBR in the 2016 GB game than Romo had in the 2007 Giants game... a game that Dak slobberers swear up and down that Romo choked in. Love that fake narrative of Dak going "toe to toe" with Aaron Rodgers... lol!

 

[khiladi]

Excuses. We scored 17 points on our 1st 4 possessions after torching this defense in the first 2 games. Then the Giants shut the Cowboys down with the aid of poor play by the Cowboys, including Romo. What the Giants went on to do against the Patriots is irrelevant. It didn't impact Crayton dropping a pass or stopping on a route, or Romo getting a grounding penalty, taking back sacks, or missing open receivers.

But you guys love to point blame on Dak while excusing Romo. Is it too hard to take a consistent approach? Why won't you go to bat for Dak at all?

excuses? You just said the Giant’s secondary was battered, and admitted Crayton dropped wise open passes..

mall the excuses in the world can’t change the fact the Giants 2007 defense was light years better than that scrub 2016 GB secondary.

and BTW, it was clear Garrett’s passing offense in 2007 was figured out by the end of the year and they were struggling going into the playoffs.

 

[khiladi]

Dak was terrible all game long against GB. He made multiple crucial mistakes, brought nothing extraordinary to the game (meanwhile Rodgers completed about a half dozen throws that Dak couldn't even attempt). The overwhelming majority of plays made by Dak, when he wasn't performing one of his 14 incompletions, were when he was standing all by himself in a pocket throwing to wide open guys. He brought nothing to the game that a JUGGS machine on wheels couldn't have brought.
Here's a funny one for ya, Dak slobberers love "QBR" (even though they can barely spell it, much less tell you how it works)... Dak had a lower QBR in the 2016 GB game than Romo had in the 2007 Giants game... a game that Dak slobberers swear up and down that Romo choked in. Love that fake narrative of Dak going "toe to toe" with Aaron Rodgers... lol!

And apparently Dez gets no credit even though he caught 9 balls for 134 yards and a 40 yard TD. Dak gets credit for that game but Dez is the reason Dak sucked the next year.

 

[Aviano90]

excuses? You just said the Giant’s secondary was battered, and admitted Crayton dropped wise open passes..

both can be true, can they not?

 

[Aviano90]

And apparently Dez gets no credit even though he caught 9 balls for 134 yards and a 40 yard TD. Dak gets credit for that game but Dez is the reason Dak sucked the next year.

Is anyone trying to blame Dez for the loss?

 

[DandyDon52]

We were down 21-3 not 21-0 and we were only down 21-3 for a minute and 34 seconds before we scored a TD. As for the 3rd quarter, we only had 1 full possession in the 3rd quarter. Granted, Dak threw the interception but it's not like we failed on multiple possessions. We were also in the process of driving for a TD at the end of the 3rd quarter / beginning of the 4th quarter.

Do you critique Romo games the same way because I hate to break it to you, it can be done. For example, did you know we scored 0 points in the 4th quarters of the NY Giants 2007 and GB 2014 playoff games? Did you also know we only scored 3 points in the 3rd quarter against the Giants and 7 points in the 3rd quarter against the Packers in those same 2 games? Did you know we only scored 3 points total against Minnesota? That's pretty pathetic offense. Maybe it couldn't have hurt to replace Romo, they may have won. I think even Weeden could have put up more points.

Well you make a decent point, and yes I did used to critique Romo the same way, only they never had a decent bkup for Romo they could go to.
Well they had orton but I dont remember what years.

2007 was the giants defense which held NE to only 14 points in SB,I think. they were a better defense than GB, so was the minnesota defense in 09.
If dak had been the qb in either of those 2 games I doubt he does much better.
GB in 14 some coaching gaffs there, but dak had same coaches, so cant say much there except dallas did not start out so bad as in 16.

just a question , do u think GB wanted Romo or Dak in that game, and which one do u think they felt they had the best chance to win against.
I bet if they were honest they would say they were hoping dallas would go with dak and stay with dak.

 

[khiladi]

Is anyone trying to blame Dez for the loss?

They blame him for Dak’s lack of success...

 

[Aviano90]

They blame him for Dak’s lack of success...

So Dez is the reason you like to bash Dak?

 

[MarcusRock]

Yes, because it is unnecessary to interpret the words of the rule as written within the context of the play in question. It's irrelevant.

I didn't change the words of the rule you straw-man inducing obfuscator. I used the words of the rule to show how they did or didn't apply to the Dez catch/non-catch such that it was a catch. Learn the point of an argument.

And I never mentioned the word "conspiracy". The colloquial term "robbed" doesn't necessarily imply a conspiracy.

ORLY? Where does it say that in the rule? What does it mean by "entire aftermath"? Where does the act of catching the ball on the "process of contacting the ground" terminate?

"Followed the rule"? Who follows a rule? Everyone knows what the intent of the rule is: to determine what is a legitimate catch. The purpose of the item is to determine if the player has control without any type of move common to the game, like situations where a player is in the air and can't actually execute them as in a diving catch. In the process of the catch Calvin Johnson clearly pinned the ball against the ground with one hand and then lost it after doing so where the ball hit the ground again. Neither of those situations applies to Dez.

No. I said the only "disputable" part of the catch is the "part of the ball touching the ground" meaning that it is unclear that it even touched the ground because it also appeared to be secured in his forearm. And because it is disputable, then the criteria for overturn has not been met. It was only after that happened that it is indisputable that the ball was bobbled after the reach and his forward momentum caused him to roll over and lose the ball in the air which he subsequently secured before the ball touched the ground. The fact that the ball touches the ground does not make the pass incomplete as the item says. It is if the receiver does not maintain control through the process of the catch and the ball hits the ground that renders it incomplete: "If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete".

Yes, it is arguable that c) did happen and I gave the reasons for it. It's irrelevant if no one actually literally "switches" the ball from two hands to one like they do from one arm to the other. I never implied that he did and that is ignoring the point. The receiver has to have control of the ball to move the ball from two hands into the a single forearm to even make the attempt at a goal lunge which is what Dez was clearly doing. It doesn't matter whether the act doesn't match the extent of other goal line lunges because the rule says nothing about that. It says acts common to the game, and it is maintaining control long enough to enable him to do those things. It doesn't even say the receiver has to be in the act of doing them.

The former rules director of the NFL telling you how a rule works seeing as he had direct experience with it is irrelevant, huh? He address the very part of this argument you're disputing, that Item 1 takes precedence over the main catch rule when it's deemed to apply. Plus, he mentions Dez Bryant by name. Yup. I'd avoid that too, as I said.

"We wuz robbed," "interpretive dance around a rule" = CONSPIRACY! Own it.

Yes, Johnson clearly "pinned" the ball to the ground here and it hit the ground "again" as you said. Even YOU don't know what you're saying anymore.


The ball was both touching the ground and secured in Dez' forearm (clear as day in stills taken from video that was reviewed) until the force of the ground jarred the ball out of his grip until lost possession in rolling over into the endzone. That is his "process of contacting the ground" where the rule states the ball can't touch the ground and come out of his possession. It did both. Captured on video for review. Dead in the water. The rest of your explanation is you being intentionally obtuse which is especially interesting when you've argued about the overrule taking away from "the spirit of the rule." And you're doing what here? Lol.

Yes, Dez made a "attempt" at a goal line lunge. And didn't execute. That's the point of the overturn. If he executed the lunge then it would have proved "time enough". No one was holding him up preventing him from doing anything so if he had time enough, he would have executed. He didn't. The officials even said they looked for it and it wasn't there.

So again, to the question you avoid (besides the video you avoid). Are you saying Dez made the very same lunge and reach effort as the other player did that I posted? Yes or no?

 

[pete026]

Well at least Dak lost to a QB with two legs.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

just a question , do u think GB wanted Romo or Dak in that game, and which one do u think they felt they had the best chance to win against.
I bet if they were honest they would say they were hoping dallas would go with dak and stay with dak.

The troll answer is whichever QB whoever is answering the question wanted out there.

The actual answer is that they probably didn't care, and saw both of them as good QBs on a team where the priority was stopping the league's most intimidating run game.

 

[Aviano90]

Well you make a decent point, and yes I did used to critique Romo the same way, only they never had a decent bkup for Romo they could go to.
Well they had orton but I dont remember what years.

2007 was the giants defense which held NE to only 14 points in SB,I think. they were a better defense than GB, so was the minnesota defense in 09.
If dak had been the qb in either of those 2 games I doubt he does much better.
GB in 14 some coaching gaffs there, but dak had same coaches, so cant say much there except dallas did not start out so bad as in 16.

just a question , do u think GB wanted Romo or Dak in that game, and which one do u think they felt they had the best chance to win against.
I bet if they were honest they would say they were hoping dallas would go with dak and stay with dak.

I think the Cowboys should have won that game with either QB. I think they could have won the SB with either QB as long as the defense didn't shatter and if they did we would be in trouble with either QB because it means the offense had to be perfect and they will never be perfect. Not with Dak and not with Romo. The defense happened to shatter against GB.

And, honestly, I don't think they had a preference which QB they faced. To a certain extent, they may have wanted Romo back there because he was more of a sitting duck. They'd eventually get a sack to put the team in bad down and distance like they did in 2014 against us. Plus Dak had marched the team into GB earlier in the year and beat them.

The defense being horrible is the focus of that game. Continuing to argue over possibly replacing one of the best performers that game is asinine IMO. Had we lost 31-14 and Dak struggled, then I would agree Romo should have played.

And the ones who typically are pro Romo will look at all his games and point out all these other reasons why Romo couldn't win, but for some reason won't look at this game and look at obstacles Dak had to overcome. They'll look for ways to defend Romo and turn around and look for ways to blame Dak. Why can't both QBs be treated consistently by the same poster regardless of who they think is the better QB. If one QB gets excused because a receiver drops a pass the other QB should be extended the same courtesy. If one QB is excused for being under pressure, the other QB should be excused as well. I am at a loss for why this is difficult for people to do.

 

[OmerV]

lol... they sure are similar stats when you add up rushing touchdowns and passing touchdowns like they are the same thing. Talk about disingenuous. A rushing TD is not a passing TD, there are a dozen players on the roster who can run behind the line for a 1 yd td and most QBs don't care about them or they would have more. Despite throwing the ball 24 less times, Romo had 11 more passing touchdowns. Romo's TD% of 7.8 was #1 in the NFL in 2014. Dak had a good year in 2016 but it wasn't anywhere close to being as good as Romo. And neither Romo's 2012 or Dak's 2019 are anywhere close to being all-time great Cowboys seasons, or even great seasons for them. You might want to look up a man named Roger Staubach.

Are you telling me that rushing TD's don't count for points like a passing TD? Wow, who knew?

Sure there are others that could run, but not also be a threat to pass, which is why those rushing TD's occur. Opponents play the pass, and Dak runs. Romo couldn't do that, so those are TD's Dak accounted for that Romo wouldn't have. The point is, after all, to score.

Would you disregard all Lamar Jackson's stats last year because so much of it is running? Face it, the goal is to score, and if a QB can find a way to make that happen with his legs as well as his arm, it counts.

 

[OmerV]

Dak threw 23 TDs against one of the weakest schedule in the league and a RB averaging 5 YPC on first down.

And Romo played 15 games, not 16. He also threw 70%.

2012, the Dallas offense sucked and was getting maligned in the press. That’s when the reigns from Garrett began to get pulled. Talk was that Dallas should play more hurry up, because they couldn’t score in the first half. Garrett couldn’t devise a game plan to save his life. Kevin Ogletree was his brothers pet project third receiver.

Dak wouldn’t have lasted a game in that season they were bottom of the league in play action.

The Cowboys actually had one of the stronger divisions in football that year with 3 teams having winning records (only one other division in the NFL had that), plus Dak was a rookie thrust into a situation unexpectedly, and in Romo was an 11 year vet. Given the circumstances, what Dak did in 2016 was pretty impressive.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking Romo. He was a strong NFL QB, and had a better passing arm than Dak. Dak is probably more of a leader and a guy who finds a way with his arms, legs, determination, taking hits when he has to - whatever it takes.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Romo in 2014 - 3705 yards, 34 TD's, 79.7 QBR
Dak in 2016 - 3667 yards, 28 TDs, 78.8 QBR

And your saying those aren't similar stats? lol

And then factor in this was a rookie season for Dak ….


As for the bet statistical seasons for a Cowboy QB …

Romo in 2012 - 4903 yards, 65.6 completion %, 28 TDs ( By the way, Romo didn't make the Pro Bowl or All Pro on his best statistical season eather
Dak in 2019 - 4903 yards, 65.1% completion %, 33 TDs
By the way, Romo didn't make the Pro Bowl or All Pro on his best statistical season either

You see people...THIS is where I feel people abuse stats. Different teams different situations. Omer...you CAN'T know what Dak would have done with 2014 team and you can;t know what Romo would have done with the 2016 team. We do have some evidence...that a healthy Romo drove the 2016 team down the field like a beast. Nice having that NFL rushing champ around! We don;t have anything for Dak in 2014....so I say Romo has the edge.

I give Dak credit for keeping his sheet together....but if you think it was Dak making the 2016 team better.....you are kidding yourself. He walked into a perfect situation....including the 2016 NFL rushing champ and what was considered a very good if not one of the best O-lines (3 1st round picks on that line....plus 1st rounder Zeke) . How many 1st year QB's get that? What a luxury and pressure relief THAT was. USUALLY...a rookie starter walks into a pretty crappy team because it was a 1st round pick.

 

[Aviano90]

You see people...THIS is where I feel people abuse stats. Different teams different situations. Omer...you CAN'T know what Dak would have done with 2014 team and you can;t know what Romo would have done with the 2016 team. We do have some evidence...that a healthy Romo drove the 2016 team down the field like a beast. Nice having that NFL rushing champ around! We don;t have anything for Dak in 2014....so I say Romo has the edge.

I give Dak credit for keeping his sheet together....but if you think it was Dak making the 2016 team better.....you are kidding yourself. He walked into a perfect situation....including the 2016 NFL rushing champ and what was considered a very good if not one of the best O-lines (3 1st round picks on that line....plus 1st rounder Zeke) . How many 1st year QB's get that? What a luxury and pressure relief THAT was. USUALLY...a rookie starter walks into a pretty crappy team because it was a 1st round pick.

The rushing champ was on the bench that drive.

 

[OmerV]

You see people...THIS is where I feel people abuse stats. Different teams different situations. Omer...you CAN'T know what Dak would have done with 2014 team and you can;t know what Romo would have done with the 2016 team. We do have some evidence...that a healthy Romo drove the 2016 team down the field like a beast. Nice having that NFL rushing champ around! We don;t have anything for Dak in 2014....so I say Romo has the edge.

I give Dak credit for keeping his sheet together....but if you think it was Dak making the 2016 team better.....you are kidding yourself. He walked into a perfect situation....including the 2016 NFL rushing champ and what was considered a very good if not one of the best O-lines (3 1st round picks on that line....plus 1st rounder Zeke) . How many 1st year QB's get that? What a luxury and pressure relief THAT was. USUALLY...a rookie starter walks into a pretty crappy team because it was a 1st round pick.

I didn't claim to know what either would have done with the other team. We were talking about statistics, and I pointed to a statistical comparison.

As for that Romo drive in the last game of the season that had no bearing on the post season, yes, it was a nice drive. No question about that. But you can't give Romo the edge based on that moment out of the entirety of the season. That makes no sense. Why not just pick one drive Dak had out of the season - those who support Dak pick the best one they can find, and those that don't pick the worst one they can find. But the reality is neither would tell the story of the entire season, and what Romo did in that moment doesn't tell the story of what he would have done if healthy the entire season.

In any case, I never claimed Romo wasn't a strong QB, so I don't know what your point is anyway. I was only pointing out some aren't viewing Dak by the same standards.