I do not have a problem with your interpretation, but it will not be universally shared by other readers.
Bold> That is the difference between football fan thinking back then and some football fan thinking--both young and old--in this current era of the game.
Exactly I don't want to get into too many details and too long of a post but I get sick of hearing how Prescott ruined the first half of those games and that's why they never caught up absolutely nonsense...
Correct just like in the Seattle game where Romo fumbled the ball that looked like it was oiled up with olive oil you know they kicking ball that was nonsense course he was sweating had hands sweating balls all oily but let's just go to the play before with a bad call by the referees in my opinion that's a first town witten was livid he had a right to be livid and we would not have been talking about the bad snap and the bad hold we would be talking about first in goal from the 1 and probably win that game....
Trance was trash and I called it in the first 5 minutes.
I'm flabbergasted that he is still demanding proof..... he knows, he's just playing this childish game trying to get people to engage with him, perhaps in a way that will allow him to hit the 'report' button while he plays the victim in an attempt to get you sidelined for 24 hours.
So you see..how bad you are tranced out. You asked me about Grier and I answered about Grier. Now you're going on and on about Lance.
We let Grier walk, who arguably had one of the best week 3 preseason games in NFL history, so we could add a fraud to the roster.
It's funny, I don't disagree with this...and I think this is supported by the facts. THAT SAID...it proves my issues with Romo in the postseason. While Dak goes "deer-in-headlights", Romo goes into a shell..."don't lose" mode and plays not to lose...and we end up losing. Because he was hyper aware of not throwing INTs -probably because if he threw 1 he was going to throw at least 5 interceptable passes afterwards - he would play too cautiously to win games we should have won.
Right...its what we do. QB1 for starters.
And you could argue one was on 4th down with no time on the clock, so throwing it away would be point less.
It is funny to me because Aikman has 60 more interceptions than Dak, but Dak has an interception problem.
Aikman also has 3 of something else that Dak will never come close to. It's funny to me that the Dak defenders always toss this fact aside.
Yes it's a team sport but the QB is the most important position on the team. You take Mahomes and put him on the Cowboys and they win a SB. You take Brady and put him on the Tampa Bay Bucks and they win a SB. Nobody is saying it's not a team sport what they are saying is a great QB can make the organization great. Chiefs and Andy Reid didn't win with Alex Smith.
Exactly, he is writing this as if Dak is a difference maker. He wasn't that before the injury, certainly isn't going to be that after.
Right...Romo was a walk on. Maybe no "pedigree" but an overachiever nonetheless.
Mahomes and the Cowboys win a Super Bowl, he can’t even win on his own team. Twice he got destroyed he never should’ve beat the 49ers either other than a Hail Mary.
Mahomes has won 3 Superbowls.
so tell me why dallas sucked when Dak's cap hit were 17,19,25M? and Purdy just signed a contract before his rookie deal is done. his cap hit was going to be low. Jerry wasn't smart enough to do that with Dak. he actually argued over 1-2M per year additional on the contract, ended up tagging him because he had no other plan and actually paid way more in that tag than the difference he was holding out for.
