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

[Aviano90]

So since you seem to be such an expert....why DID rom "Struggle" in 2015. Are now to say good QB's DON;t have a season of "struggling"?

Brady "struggled" in 2019...and that was AL his fault, right?

Maybe one day people will have some semblance of consistency in their logic when bashing Romo. Who knows?

I don’t claim to be an “expert” but I can see his performance dipped in 2015. Watched the first couple
games of the season yesterday on NFL Game Pass and he was off target. He threw several balls behind receivers that stalled drives and/or caused interceptions. He made a nice comeback that game (dinking and dunking) late in the first game.

And I am not bashing Romo. I am showing how he did the same things you guys complain about Dak. It’s very simple to do. It’s like you want to remember all the positives about Romo while highlighting all the negatives about Dak. Why do you guys do that? Are you guys that damn pissed off about 2016 you can’t move the hell on? Not you personally but you in general.

 

[DandyDon52]

So since you seem to be such an expert....why DID rom "Struggle" in 2015. Are now to say good QB's DON;t have a season of "struggling"?

Brady "struggled" in 2019...and that was AL his fault, right?

Maybe one day people will have some semblance of consistency in their logic when bashing Romo. Who knows?

well he only played 1 1/2 games before being hurt, so I dont get how he can say Romo struggled lol. Too small of a sample
and the other 2 games were games he should not have even been on the field.

 

[DandyDon52]

I don’t claim to be an “expert” but I can see his performance dipped in 2015. Watched the first couple
games of the season yesterday on NFL Game Pass and he was off target. He threw several balls behind receivers that stalled drives and/or caused interceptions. He made a nice comeback that game (dinking and dunking) late in the first game.

And I am not bashing Romo. I am showing how he did the same things you guys complain about Dak. It’s very simple to do. It’s like you want to remember all the positives about Romo while highlighting all the negatives about Dak. Why do you guys do that? Are you guys that damn pissed off about 2016 you can’t move the hell on? Not you personally but you in general.

Well I had moved on till this thread came up!!
Back then it did piss me off that they didnt play romo, or go to him in that GB game. He served no purpose on the bench and was the most
expensive bkup qb ever!
I just didnt think dak was ready for playoffs and especially GB.

Then I wanted to see romo play for another team, but he took the cbs job.
but I think i am tired of rehashing it so will move on again.

 

[Sevenup3000]

Couple of points regarding this dumb and tired topic:

1. If it wasn't for Dak Prescott, 2016 would have been a repeat of 2015. If it wasn't for Dak Prescott, there would be no season for Romo to even "save" in 2016. The Giants and the Eagles would have long ran off with the division by the time Romo was ready to play. If Dak didn't perform as a historically great rookie, Romo would have blew out his back trying to save a 1-7 Dallas or Romo wouldn't even had tried to come back at all in 2016 because the Cowboys chances would have been next to zero of even getting to the post-season.

All this BS about how Romo deserved his shot to play in the playoffs would be null and void if not for the play of Dak Prescott. Romo, given 2015, would have had to go 8-0 in the last 8 games to even have a SHOT at getting to the post season. And of course would have needed to actual complete more than 3 games in a row without injury.

2. Speaking of 2015...The Dallas Cowboys did EXACTLY what you wanted them to do in 2016...except they did it in 2015. Romo gets injured...Romo gets inserted back into the QB spot...Romo proceeded to throw pick after pick against the Panthers on Thanksgiving...ending up hurting himself AGAIN...the Cowboys lost all but eliminating them from playoff contention.

This fantasy world that you people like to live in where Romo rides in and saves the day...ALREADY HAPPENED. It happened just the season prior...Guess what? It FAILED miserably.

In 2016, the Dallas Cowboys ALREADY HAD their "savior" in Dak...so unless Romo was good to go play CB...the 2016 Cowboys didn't need Romo. The 2015 Cowboys did though. How come Romo couldn't save that season?

MAYBE if Romo showed that he could win the SB in 2015...maybe the Cowboys would have felt better about repeating the same plan in 2016. Instead, if I am Dallas, I am RIGHTFULLY trying something different and riding the horse that ACTUALLY brought me to the dance.

3. Romo had 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, etc. to go win a SB. MAYBE if Romo showed he could even get to a SB in any of the decade prior to 2016, the Cowboys would have felt the need to go to him in again. However, Romo has never shown the ability to go on a SB run...so AGAIN, I am going with the QB that is ACTUALLY the reason why 2016 wasn't a repeat of 2015: Dak Prescott.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

well he only played 1 1/2 games before being hurt, so I dont get how he can say Romo struggled lol. Too small of a sample
and the other 2 games were games he should not have even been on the field.

lol, you have to remember we are dealing with brain dead Dak slobberers who can barely read and write complete sentences, much less analyze football. Romo played fine in 2015 in the brief time he wasn't hurt.
Remember, Romo played one of the worst games of his career to start off 2014, that terrible game against the Niners where he had three interceptions. It took weeks to drag his numbers out of the mud I'm sure, but he ended up with the 6th highest rating in NFL history, As you said, it's called sample size... a concept beyond a bunch of Boomers living out their final years in isolation.

 

[Aviano90]

well he only played 1 1/2 games before being hurt, so I dont get how he can say Romo struggled lol. Too small of a sample
and the other 2 games were games he should not have even been on the field.

This is the what I don’t understand, 1.5 games is too small of a sample size for 2015. Yet one drive is enough to rate him on 2016. I am literally dumbfounded at the things that are said in defense of Romo.

 

[Asklesko]

Yes, it was a mistake, for those playoffs at least. Romo had the experience and was at a higher level. And I don't see why giving him one more shot was such a bad thing. Dak was the future, sure, but Romo was still the best qb on the team.

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

Yes, it was a mistake, for those playoffs at least. Romo had the experience and was at a higher level. And I don't see why giving him one more shot was such a bad thing. Dak was the future, sure, but Romo was still the best qb on the team.

His level wasn't that high anymore because he was fragile.

 

[Asklesko]

His level wasn't that high anymore because he was fragile.

If he broke, then Dak would have gone in. No biggie.

 

[Sevenup3000]

If he broke, then Dak would have gone in. No biggie.

Yes, biggie. Dak was a rookie. And maybe the Cowboys would be more inclined to insert Romo into the starting lineup in 2016...if when in 2015 they inserted him back into the starting lineup it wasn't such a disaster. Maybe if Romo shown that he could win the SB in 2015 -- under somewhat similar conditions -- maybe the Cowboys should have had that discussion. But 2015 happened...I know this board HATES talking about 2015 and for whatever reason is fixated HARD on 2016 (as if 2014 and 2015 were not as good as any to win the SB) but it happened. 2015 really happened and it informed the team's decision making in 2016.

And this is not the movies. Cam Newton didn't get a story book ending in Carolina...and he did far far far far more for the Panthers than Romo did for the Cowboys. When it looked like Allen might be the future, Newton was thrown to the side far more disrespectfully than Romo ever was.

And besides, if it wasn't for the play of Dak, Romo would have quickly broken his back again trying to save the 1-7 Cowboys season in 2016 because the only difference between 2015 and 2016 was QB play...i.e. Dak Prescott.

 

[Aviano90]

Yes, biggie. Dak was a rookie. And maybe the Cowboys would be more inclined to insert Romo into the starting lineup in 2016...if when in 2015 they inserted him back into the starting lineup it wasn't such a disaster. Maybe if Romo shown that he could win the SB in 2015 -- under somewhat similar conditions -- maybe the Cowboys should have had that discussion. But 2015 happened...I know this board HATES talking about 2015 and for whatever reason is fixated HARD on 2016 (as if 2014 and 2015 were not as good as any to win the SB) but it happened. 2015 really happened and it informed the team's decision making in 2016.

And this is not the movies. Cam Newton didn't get a story book ending in Carolina...and he did far far far far more for the Panthers than Romo did for the Cowboys. When it looked like Allen might be the future, Newton was thrown to the side far more disrespectfully than Romo ever was.

And besides, if it wasn't for the play of Dak, Romo would have quickly broken his back again trying to save the 1-7 Cowboys season in 2016 because the only difference between 2015 and 2016 was QB play...i.e. Dak Prescott.

You’re using too much logic. These guys don’t use logic, they use spin and contradict themselves left and right.

On one hand they will say Romo came back too early in 2015. They say this as a defense that Romo played like crap and got hurt again.

Then they will turn around and say he should have been inserted back in the starting lineup in 2016. When you bring up injury concerns they will tell you he was healthy or he wouldn’t be cleared to play.

It’s just one contradiction after another with these guys as they just try to come up with some way to make Romo look as good as possible.

 

[Asklesko]

Yes, biggie. Dak was a rookie. And maybe the Cowboys would be more inclined to insert Romo into the starting lineup in 2016...if when in 2015 they inserted him back into the starting lineup it wasn't such a disaster. Maybe if Romo shown that he could win the SB in 2015 -- under somewhat similar conditions -- maybe the Cowboys should have had that discussion. But 2015 happened...I know this board HATES talking about 2015 and for whatever reason is fixated HARD on 2016 (as if 2014 and 2015 were not as good as any to win the SB) but it happened. 2015 really happened and it informed the team's decision making in 2016.

And this is not the movies. Cam Newton didn't get a story book ending in Carolina...and he did far far far far more for the Panthers than Romo did for the Cowboys. When it looked like Allen might be the future, Newton was thrown to the side far more disrespectfully than Romo ever was.

And besides, if it wasn't for the play of Dak, Romo would have quickly broken his back again trying to save the 1-7 Cowboys season in 2016 because the only difference between 2015 and 2016 was QB play...i.e. Dak Prescott.

Come now. The past was the past. Romo was ready to go. You can't say for certainty what would have happened. There was just as much chance he would have succeeded. And wouldn't it indeed have been great to give him one last ride. Dak, as you said, was a rookie. Usually, you know, that means the player defers to the veteran. Anyway you slice it, what they did to Romo was an injustice. I just don't see why everyone was so hostile to the idea.

 

[stiletto]

Read the first post, no way I am going through all 22 pages. I am allowed my opinion. Tony was broken-down. He was hurting. It is what it is, his second career is far better than his first and I think he is doing great. I am a big fan of his time as the Dallas QB and I am a big fan of his Broadcasting. He is this Generation's Don Meredith. Enjoy him every Sunday. Hopefully he calls some amazing Cowboys victories in the future. Now we just need a re-invigoration of that feeling the old-school MNF gave us old school fans. God, I miss that....

 

[Asklesko]

You’re using too much logic. These guys don’t use logic, they use spin and contradict themselves left and right.

On one hand they will say Romo came back too early in 2015. They say this as a defense that Romo played like crap and got hurt again.

Then they will turn around and say he should have been inserted back in the starting lineup in 2016. When you bring up injury concerns they will tell you he was healthy or he wouldn’t be cleared to play.

It’s just one contradiction after another with these guys as they just try to come up with some way to make Romo look as good as possible.

Romo had the whole preseason and season to mend. That would certainly not have been coming back too early. 2016 was no 2015.

 

[8FOR!3]

Romo was done. And I am as big of a Romo fan as anybody, but it just wasn't going to happen. He had his chances and his body gave up on him. He has continued to kill it in life since, I'm sure he doesn't have any regrets with how his career transitioned to the next stage. We made the right decision to ride the wave of momentum.

 

[Coy]

This is the what I don’t understand, 1.5 games is too small of a sample size for 2015. Yet one drive is enough to rate him on 2016. I am literally dumbfounded at the things that are said in defense of Romo.

Well he played great for that 1.5 games in 2015, comeback win vs Giants in the last drive, having a QB rating of over 100, and was playing very well against the Eagles when he got injured, check it out if you'd like.

 

[MarcusRock]

Argument from authority is fallacious. The rule is written in the English language. A language contains terms that correspond to concepts which have meaning. None of the words in the rule explicitly state that Item 1 "takes precedence" over "the main catch" rule. That is what is called post facto rationalization by an NFL spokesperson. He doesn't even use the right terminology. Item 1 would merely come into play if c) can be justifiably questioned, which can only occur if the player is unable (because he is in no position to enable himself to execute a move "common to the game"): "Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so". Now that I think about it even more, this renders all of "going to the ground" irrelevant because it is simply a judgement call that is disputable as to whether Dez couldn't do at least one of those things in c) referenced as an example after doing a) and b), especially an attempt to pitch the ball since he clearly had two hands on it and had control enough to move the ball to grasp it in his forearm and attempt a reach with it after both feet touched the ground.

The term robbed in the colloquial football context has the connotation of believing that something was taken from your team that they rightfully possess. Conspiracy implies a nefarious intention by two or more league officials to willfully remove that possession. Learn terminology.

Yes, I do. Johnson pinned the ball with one hand with his hand on top of the ball and its bottom on the ground clear for the world to see as he came down on his butt using it to brace his fall. After that the ball was lifted slightly in the air when he tries to grip it with his hand which he fails to do. Watch the video.

No it's not "clear as day". And like I said, the rule states, "If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete." Read the sentence over and over gain and pay attention to what the language explicitly states about sequence. The first phrase precedes the second phrase and this positioning also implies a prior sequence in time which means he has to have lost the control of the ball before it hits the ground. The "before he regains control" is redundant, but nevertheless it emphasizes the situation even more. But that doesn't apply to Dez when he makes the reach because he had control well before that point. That only applies to when the ball is jarred loose due to the force of ground knocking his arm and the ball upwards out of the full possession of his arm into a slight bobble which he catches anyway before it can hit the ground.

He did execute. He just didn't execute to a undefined standard of extent that you presume to apply, which is irrelevant anyway because all the rule requires is that the receiver must have enough control to enable him to execute such a move.

LOL. I've dealt with many word salad defenders of the CONSPIRACY! angle on this one so this is nothing new. Again, I ask, if Pereira was wrong, who fact checked him? Other than Cowboys fans, why doesn't the grand expose exist? You have good reason to not want to accept the mechanics of the rule so of course you won't accept that the actual keepers of the rules also can't explain them. They don't even have to because of the way they're written. I get it though. Willfully obtuse is a strategy.

If you "have time" to perform a football move, attempt one and don't complete it, you didn't have time. Lol. That's all there is on the main rule.

On Item 1, more word salad but you again conveniently leave out: "must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground" which is the first sentence and backdrop of the entire rule. You leave this out AGAIN because it dispels your isolated "sequence" charade meant to take away context. That sentence refers to losing control of the ball at any point ("throughout") in the process of contacting the ground including Dez losing control of the ball from hitting the ground and then rolling over "before he regains control" per the rule. Incomplete. Why'd you leave out that first sentence? The lawyers on here like your style though, lol.


3rd time asking. Is Dez' attempt at a lunge and reach of the ball as demonstrative and complete as Anquan Boldin's here? Yes or no?

 

[Aviano90]

Well he played great for that 1.5 games in 2015, comeback win vs Giants in the last drive, having a QB rating of over 100, and was playing very well against the Eagles when he got injured, check it out if you'd like.

I just watched the games two days ago. It was interesting to watch them through the lens of how Dak is criticized by Romo lovers. I’d encourage you to check it out.

Pay particular attention to the accuracy of the passes and see just how many were behind receivers where they had to adjust to fact the ball, or dropped it, or tipped it for an interception. Also keep in mind these teams were teams with losing records. Dak is hammered even when we blow these types of teams out.

 

[Aviano90]

Romo had the whole preseason and season to mend. That would certainly not have been coming back too early. 2016 was no 2015.

He was cleared to play in 2015. And I find it hilarious nobody was talking about Romo coming back too early. All I heard was how quickly he could get back out there and there was a ton of talk about how “we could run the table”.

Romo gets hurt and we get blown out by Carolina proving we couldn’t run the table and the narrative changed to “he shouldn’t have been out there”.

 

[Buzzbait]

If he broke, then Dak would have gone in. No biggie.

"IF" ?? IF he broke? I didn't know there was any doubt about it. That "IF" is just wishful thinking.
And that's coming from a long time avid Romo fan. I was sick of Drew Bledsoe and was rooting for Romo before he became a starter, but at least some of us knew that when it was time for him to quit, it was time for him to quit.