Our Record If Romo Played All Year?

[JoeyBoy718]

How bout this one: What would our record be all those years we went 8-8 if we had Romo? Oh wait...

 

[Dave_in-NC]

How bout this one: What would our record be all those years we went 8-8 if we had Romo? Oh wait...

Stole my prediction.

 

[Nation]

I'd go with 7-6 or 8-5. The offense just never looked great all year to me, even with Romo in. Dez was never a true #1, and the secondary weapons beyond Dez have been atrocious.

 

[rynochop]

I think if we had had Romo and AP all year we would be undefeated and Carolina wouldnt . . . . . . . . .

I know you put a smiley in there, but that's not far fetched at all...the defense would have more take always for sure. But if ifs and buts we're candy and nuts.ha

 

[StarBoyz83]

They would for sure made the playoffs but would've lost so it doesn't really matter.

 

[Staubacher]

10-3.

Man. This thread of what could have been hurts my heart. Thanks a lot Staubacher.

Sorry lol Sometimes you have to daydream to get by...

 

[Staubacher]

Stop playing hypotehticals to pretend we're a good team. We're 1-8 without Romo and we average as an 8-8 team every year with Romo. One fluke good season and fans want to play the "what if" game to convince themselves we'd be the Patriots this past decade if we caught a few breaks. We suck. Deal with it.

Thanks for sharing but Romo's career record is well above .500. It's the guys who played in his absence that led to a few 8-8 years.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

I've seen a few people in this thread say we'd be a 9-4 team with Romo. Think about that for a second... 9-4 is the record of a contender. Maybe not a Super Bowl favorite, but definitely a legit contender. To the people saying we'd be 9-4, have you seen this team play this year? Have you seen this team play this year WITH Romo? We struggled to beat 3 bad teams and we got embarrassed by a good team. That's with Romo. Don't let 3-1 fool you. We're lucky we weren't 2-2 from that Giants game.

I'm not saying Romo isn't great. We're a 1-2 win team annually with Romo. And on average throughout his career, we're a 8-8 team with Romo. He accounts for 7 wins by himself. That's greatness... But you're fooling yourself if you think we're a great team with Romo. One 12-win season and people forget the past decade? Last year's team was a good team and a contender. Those 8-9 win teams were not good teams and not contenders. If an elite QB can account for 7 wins by himself, think of how good a team has to be on its own. A contender is a 6-win team without their QB. We're a 1-win team.

If you still believe we're a contender with Romo, rewatch the Giants, Eagles, Dolphins and Panthers game. Then watch a few games of the Cardinals, Patriots, Broncos, Panthers. Do we look like those teams?

 

[Staubacher]

How bout this one: What would our record be all those years we went 8-8 if we had Romo? Oh wait...

Romo career record: 80-53 (incl. playoffs)

Lawyered.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Thanks for sharing but Romo's career record is well above .500. It's the guys who played in his absence that led to a few 8-8 years.

His career average is .602. That's 9.5 wins a season. That gets you in the playoffs maybe half the time. So if Romo never missed a game in his career, we'd be a 9.5 win team every season. That's not a contender. Sometimes a 9-win teams gets hot and wins it all, but usually not. So even if your hypothetical universe, we're still barely above the status quo.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Romo career record: 80-53 (incl. playoffs)

Lawyered.

See my last post. But good job though. I like your effort.

 

[Staubacher]

His career average is .602. That's 9.5 wins a season. That gets you in the playoffs maybe half the time. So if Romo never missed a game in his career, we'd be a 9.5 win team every season. That's not a contender. Sometimes a 9-win teams gets hot and wins it all, but usually not. So even if your hypothetical universe, we're still barely above the status quo.

Thanks for hijacking my thread. Which was about where we would be THIS year.

Obviously we stink without Romo, this year and past.

Romo going 9-7 or 8-8 in a few of those years (he often did better than that) was despite idiot Garrett and bad defenses.

But back to my ORIGINAL THREAD point - most agree despite our flaws we'd have a few more wins this year and be leading a poor division. No one said we would be Super Bowl locks.

Geez I realize you are bitter - we all are presently. This thread was for escape and amusement. Thanks for dumping on it.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Romo career record: 80-53 (incl. playoffs)

Lawyered.

80/53 = .602. Not even 10 wins a season. See my other post. But you also have to factor in his durability. He breaks his collarbone every time he gets tackled. In your universe, Sean Lee is a 4-time Defensive MVP.

So with Romo's 9.5 win average when completely healthy, factored in with his injury proneness, you get... an 8-8 team.

I'm glad to see you're so accepting of mediocrity.

 

[Hardline]

Simply no way of knowing.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Thanks for hijacking my thread. Which was about where we would be THIS year.

Obviously we stink without Romo, this year and past.

Romo going 9-7 or 8-8 in a few of those years (he often did better than that) was despite idiot Garrett and bad defenses.

But back to my ORIGINAL THREAD point - most agree despite our flaws we'd have a few more wins this year and be leading a poor division. No one said we would be Super Bowl locks.

Geez I realize you are bitter - we all are presently. This thread was for escape and amusement. Thanks for dumping on it.

And most are delusional. I'm not saying we wouldn't win the division this year if Romo was fully healthy. The division is historically bad. But I don't pat myself on the back for mediocrity. That's how the Colts made the playoffs almost every year the past 2 decades... I'm saying we're an 8-8 team on average WITH Romo. Sure, that's good enough to win the division THIS year. Whatever helps you sleep at night...

 

[Staubacher]

And most are delusional. I'm not saying we wouldn't win the division this year if Romo was fully healthy. The division is historically bad. But I don't pat myself on the back for mediocrity. That's how the Colts made the playoffs almost every year the past 2 decades... I'm saying we're an 8-8 team on average WITH Romo. Sure, that's good enough to win the division THIS year. Whatever helps you sleep at night...

Dude what is your problem? No one is doing cartwheels, certainly not me. If you bothered to read my posts for the last 3 months you'd know that I'm not accepting of the crap we've all endured this year and some seasons past. This was a hypothetical thread that you decided to get on your rantbox about for no applicable reason.

 

[HappyOnions]

I think we'd be sitting somewhere around 7-6 right about now. I don't think we would have repeated the same kind of success that we had last season, although I do think we would have a game or two over the rest of the division.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Dude what is your problem? No one is doing cartwheels, certainly not me. If you bothered to read my posts for the last 3 months you'd know that I'm not accepting of the crap we've all endured this year and some seasons past. This was a hypothetical thread that you decided to get on your rantbox about for no applicable reason.

I was addressing the people saying we'd be a 9-4 team, which I said is the record of a legit Super Bowl contender. I backed it up by pointing out the fact that we're not very good historically with Romo. He has a .602 winning percentage when he starts. If you factor in how often he's injured, it makes sense that we're an 8-win team on average with him. And .602 isn't so great (you apparently "lawyered" me in another post). 10/16 is .625 so that means we're not even a 10-win team with Romo. His career winning record is much worse than many current QBs. That's no slight against Romo. It's just an indication of how bad this team is that we're still not very good even with Romo. And that's why I have a problem with a hypothetical thread about us being a 9-4 team. Not even close. Things aren't so simple. You can't just say, "Well, we lost a lot of games by less than 5 points. Assuming Romo is good enough for an additional 7 points a game, that would mean we'd have won ALL those games with Romo." Sorry, that's not how it works.

 

[Chuck 54]

8-8 with Romo, IMO

 

[Floatyworm]

How soon we forget the Carolina debacle...and Romo's 3 INT'S.....