Most TD QB+WR Combo's since 2011

[Trouty]

Because it assumes an either-or situation, as if Dak wouldn't exist if Romo beat him out. We'd have Romo starting and Dak coming in if Romo got hurt, and Dak eventually taking over anyway. The argument is always Romo shouldn't have had a chance to play because he may have gotten hurt.

Sorry if the logic is too complex to grasp, seems to be an issue here..

Ah, passive-aggression. Ok, bro.

I said nothing straw man. You even said "makes no sense" -- that sentiment is for you -- you're feelings, hombre. Your feelings, vs others, are equal. It makes plenty of sense to others.

Cut it out, hoss.

 

[Staubacher]

I dont think you are using "straw man" correctly, here, Staubacher. In the case of your response to my post, at least.

I posited a question, I didn't make a declarative statement based on zero facts/hyperbole/wish-casting. We all know Romo was hurt, chronically, for his last 3 season's. He played all-world in 2014, but was hurt then, even. It isn't an outlandish question to ask. Again, not declarative.

I asked you a legit question, and you replied, "who knows?" Your statement, "but the best QB would be starting" is more straw man than anything I posted. We don't know that Romo would be starting. We simply don't, brother. And that is an injury-based observation.

You are talking about Romo starting "now", my whole point was he deserved a chance to win his job back "then". My presupposition was he would have beat out Dak because he was (is) better than Dak. Saying Romo would or not be injured eventually is not relevant to that point.

I stand by my belief but it is useless to argue with people here as every Romo thread becomes this circular firing squad. It's a shame.

What IS relevant NOW is our current QB may be fading fast.

 

[Trouty]

You are talking about Romo starting "now", my whole point was he deserved a chance to win his job back "then". My presupposition was he would have beat out Dak because he was (is) better than Dak. Saying Romo would or not be injured eventually is not relevant to that point.

I stand by my belief but it is useless to argue with people here as every Romo thread becomes this circular firing squad. It's a shame.

Bro, I love Romo. I adore Romo. You are barking up the wrong tree, here.

I also saw him take some damning injures his last couple seasons. It is what it is. Now, I've laid off my praise for Dak these last few weeks, because I don't like some of what I'm seeing. Still, Romo playing a full season for us is a question mark, IMO.

 

[Staubacher]

Bro, I love Romo. I adore Romo. You are barking up the wrong tree, here.

I also saw him take some damning injures his last couple seasons. It is what it is. Now, I've laid off my praise for Dak these last few weeks, because I don't like some of what I'm seeing. Still, Romo playing a full season for us is a question mark, IMO.

As you said, cut it out..dead hoss. Heck I still pine for Staubach hence my username!

 

[Trouty]

As you said, cut it out..dead hoss.

Cut what out? I have asked you legitimate questions. You want me to stop responding to you, brother?

And what does "dead hoss" mean? Serious question.

 

[Trouty]

Myou could argue that their coaching careers were wasted on Romo as well though.

Gotta disagree with you here, my boi. Romo made the careers of his coaches (as well as a few WRs) and kept us as relevant as a single man can for this dysfunctional side show.

 

[Staubacher]

Cut what out? I have asked you legitimate questions. You want me to stop responding to you, brother?

And what does "dead hoss" mean? Serious question.

It means we are beating a dead horse at this point. Day drinking?

 

[Trouty]

As you said, cut it out..dead hoss. Heck I still pine for Staubach hence my username!

Cut what out? Responding to you?

 

[CowboyRoy]

I see you are incapable of rational discussion and resort to childish lingo.

It's heels by the way not heals.

Is this quote below by you what you would call "rational discussion"?

Nobody is crying (except you). The thread was about the Romo-Dez connection. So if you don't want to hear Romo talk there are hundreds of other threads instead. Cowboys fans talk about things a lot longer ago than Romo as well.

Sounds like an upset little baby crying some more.

 

[Trouty]

It means we are beating a dead horse at this point. Day drinking?

Always, lately. But I'm functional. But that's neither here nor there.

Never heard "dead hoss"

Now, "Dead horse" I've heard.

 

[Staubacher]

Is this quote below by you what you would call "rational discussion"?

Nobody is crying (except you). The thread was about the Romo-Dez connection. So if you don't want to hear Romo talk there are hundreds of other threads instead. Cowboys fans talk about things a lot longer ago than Romo as well.

Sounds like an upset little baby crying some more.

Yes that was completely rational - the comment I was responding to was you literally saying "Waaaaaaaa".

I'm moving on from your childishness. Ignored.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Because it assumes an either-or situation, as if Dak wouldn't exist if Romo beat him out. We'd have Romo starting and Dak coming in if Romo got hurt, and Dak eventually taking over anyway. The argument is always Romo shouldn't have had a chance to play because he may have gotten hurt.

Sorry if the logic is too complex to grasp, seems to be an issue here..

Anybody with half a brain could see that:

-Dak was rolling
-Dak was the future
-Dak had the confidence and chemistry of the team
-Dak was young and NOT injury prone
-Romo was toast

Heck even Romo himself could see that Dak earned remaining the starter. He actually had a press conference like a man and said so. EVEN Witten knew they needed to stick with Dak.

And even the hapless, CLAPPY GARRETT figured out sticking with Dak was the right call.


Why couldnt YOU figure it out is big mystery. Or is it a mystery? So when were you going to put Romo back in? At what point during the teams 11 game win streak were you going switch everything up?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Yes that was completely rational - the comment I was responding to was you literally saying "Waaaaaaaa".

I'm moving on from your childishness. Ignored.

Might as well move on from the entire thread as no one is buying your nonsense. Quite frankly, nobody wants to hear the Romo cry babies anymore. AS you can plainly see.

 

[Trouty]

Might as well move on from the entire thread as no one is buying your nonsense. Quite frankly, nobody wants to hear the Romo cry babies anymore. AS you can plainly see.

I love Romo, it sucks he went out the way he did (injuries; not the usurping).

Still, I think we need to move on. Romo is gone forever.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You are talking about Romo starting "now", my whole point was he deserved a chance to win his job back "then". My presupposition was he would have beat out Dak because he was (is) better than Dak. Saying Romo would or not be injured eventually is not relevant to that point.

I stand by my belief but it is useless to argue with people here as every Romo thread becomes this circular firing squad. It's a shame.

What IS relevant NOW is our current QB may be fading fast.

LOL...........Dak is fading fast? Another boneheaded comment by a Romo apologist/cry baby.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I love Romo, it sucks he went out the way he did (injuries; not the usurping).

Still, I think we need to move on. Romo is gone forever.

Yep. And I am thanking my lucky stars that we won the lottery and were immediately able to hit the ground running with Dak. For any Cowboy fan to act like this wasnt a complete stoke of luck is a troll.

 

[Trouty]

Yep. And I am thanking my lucky stars that we won the lottery and were immediately able to hit the ground running with Dak. For any Cowboy fan to act like this was a complete stroke of luck should be burned at the stake.

Some fans (well, a lot) believe we may not quite be as lucky as we originally thought with Dak. Just saying, Roy.

 

[perrykemp]

Chemistry matters.

Jordy Nelson was leading the league once again in TD receptions up until the point Rodgers got hurt. Nelson has exactly zero TD catches since and has zero chemistry with Hundley.

For whatever reason Dak just hasn't much chemistry with Dez Bryant, and his TD reception numbers have gone way down.

I see some parallels.

 

[Trouty]

Chemistry matters. Jordy Nelson was leading the league once again in TD receptions up until the point Rodgers got hurt. Nelson has exactly zero TD catches since and has zero chemistry with Hundley.

For whatever reason Dak just hasn't much chemistry with Dez Bryant, and his TD reception numbers have gone way down. I see some parallels.

Hopefully it's between Dez and Jordy, and not Dak and Hundley

 

[CowboyRoy]

Some fans (well, a lot) believe we may not quite be as lucky as we originally thought with Dak. Just saying, Roy.

Anyone that didnt at least slighty downgrade Dak or have pause over Dak after those 3 games is turning a blind eye.