Romo vs Dak

[khiladi]

Holy **** you just did the same anal crap a few posts ago. Literally one of the biggest hypocrites on this site. That's quite an accomplishment. Bravo

and you haven’t said anything of value throughout this whole conversation, meaning you can’t refute what I said.

 

[Philmonroe]

For Tony’s entire career, and to this day, the Romoholic Mantra is:

Cowboys win: “Tony carried the whole team.”
Cowboys loss: “Tony couldn’t carry the whole team.”

Con Safos del Mundo

Same logic with Dak so what the hell is your point?

 

[408Cowboy]

romo didn’t have his MVP season in his first year with Linehan being robbed on the road in Lambeau, was basically flawless in sub-zero temperature, and for the regular season throwing 70%, 34 TD and 9 INTs that season ? What are you smoking?

That has nothing to do with what I posted. Your deflecting again.

and you haven’t said anything of value throughout this whole conversation, meaning you can’t refute what I said.

 

[khiladi]

That has nothing to do with what I posted. Your deflecting again.

you clearly don’t know what deflecting is. You said Romo was on year 10 in response to me post. I brought up Parcells to point out the stupidity in this argument. You’ve been posting nonsense ever since including some nonsense about Romo not performing with ‘this roster’?

 

[Philmonroe]

This subject has been discussed enough. Time to move on guys.

You can help by not posting in a thread you seemingly don’t care about

 

[IheartRomo]

second ranked scoring offense in the league, 4211 yards passing, 36 TDs thrown, while being sacked 24 times in his second year and Dak is farther along? A Dak who in his third year starting was basically sacking himself a majority of times to a whopping 56, while being among the top QBs in time to throw, along with a league leading fumbles in year 3, with Linehan calling the plays?

5th year*. It is disingenuous to ignore the growth that Romo enjoyed between his rookie year and when he actually saw the field 3+ seasons later.

 

[khiladi]

5th year*. It is disingenuous to ignore the growth that Romo enjoyed between his rookie year and when he actually saw the field 3+ seasons later.

second year starting in the same roster that had a veteran QB looking pathetic with Bill Parcells himself looking like he was about to have a heart attack. There is no way one can argue that bring a practice QB in anyway gives you the equivalent of starting experience. Dak is in year 4 as a full time starter, with a Whole roster set to minimize his mistakes, while Romo had to carry trash.

teams are NOT defending Dak like they did with Romo, which was basically two safeties all day long. If Romo saw as many one deep safety, obvious man that Dak sees, the guy would throw for over 5000 yards.

 

[408Cowboy]

you clearly don’t know what deflecting is. You said Romo was on year 10 in response to me post. I brought up Parcells to point out the stupidity in this argument. You’ve been posting nonsense ever since including some nonsense about Romo not performing with ‘this roster’?

I never said Romo didn't perform with this roster. You just pulled that out your ***

 

[cern]

They say if you live long enough you will see and hear it all.
lol......

the universe is always expanding, ergo you will never see it all.

 

[khiladi]

I never said Romo didn't perform with this roster. You just pulled that out your ***

Who even knows what your saying anymore.

Who cares? You once argued Dak needs the best to succeed and that Romo never got a shot in 16 to play with Zeke when he was drafted for Romo. It was a straight whine fest. I then asked you a simple question that if it's true that Dak's success in 16 was due to having all the talent around him shouldn't the same be said for Romo who as you said that team was built for? You then spent about 5 pages dodging that question.

If he never got to play with Zeke, then how can one talk about the team getting credit for Romo’s success, especially when my responses have clearly been taking about Romo’s early career? And then your talking about early years of Romo and now your about the roster Dak played with.

you make NO SENSE, because you are all over the place looking for any reason to save a bogus position regarding Dak.

 

[cern]

romo went to far more stars and mavs games with garrett than dak ever will.

 

[408Cowboy]

Who even knows what your saying anymore.



If he never got to play with Zeke, then how can one talk about the team getting credit for Romo’s success, especially when my responses have clearly been taking about Romo’s early career? And then your talking about early years of Romo and now your about the roster Dak played with.

you make NO SENSE, because you are all over the place looking for any reason to save a bogus position regarding Dak.

You used to whine that Dak needed everything to succeed like his rookie year.

You used to whine that it wasn't fair that Romo didn't get a shot in 16 with a team that was made for him

Using that logic I asked if it would then be true to say Romo also needed everything to succeed.

You spent multiple pages dodging the question and deflecting.

You still don't understand the question.

Go back a page or two and you accuse me of being selective.

A few posts later you do the same thing you complain about.

You still won't understand any of this.

 

[IheartRomo]

second year starting. There is no way one can argue that bring a practice QB in anyway gives you the equivalent of starting experience, so nah..

No, the experienced gained is not apples to apples. But if you don't think Romo got infinitely better over that time frame, then I'm not sure what to tell you. Parcells, Payton, Romo himself, everyone has unanimously mentioned how he wasn't at all ready to play those first couple years.

 

[408Cowboy]

No, the experienced gained is not apples to apples. But if you don't think Romo got infinitely better over that time frame, then I'm not sure what to tell you. Parcells, Payton, Romo himself, everyone has unanimously mentioned how he wasn't at all ready to play those first couple years.

In his A Football Life it was said he used that time to work on his accuracy. That point is always ignored or vaugley acknowledged when brought up.

 

[IheartRomo]

second year starting in the same roster that had a veteran QB looking pathetic with Bill Parcells himself looking like he was about to have a heart attack. There is no way one can argue that bring a practice QB in anyway gives you the equivalent of starting experience. Dak is in year 4 as a full time starter, with a Whole roster set to minimize his mistakes, while Romo had to carry trash.

teams are NOT defending Dak like they did with Romo, which was basically two safeties all day long. If Romo saw as many one deep safety, obvious man that Dak sees, the guy would throw for over 5000 yards.

Romo was a great QB. I was a huge fan. But it's laughable how those that hate Dak have desperately tried to twist the narrative into Romo having no offensive help at all. It's completely false. He had solid offensive talent around him just about every season.

If you're talking about defensive help, I'd agree wholeheartedly. 2009 was probably the only legitimately good defense Romo ever had (2007 as alright). However, Dak really hasn't had any help in that regard either. I see Dak as a quarterback showing great improvement and on track or even ahead of the curve for where you'd want a 4th year QB to be. He's not a finished product like Romo was in 2014, but even Romo himself wasn't until then.

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

You clearly know what I meant. Being anal doesn’t refute the evidence. Dak is in year 4 as a STARTER while bring in optimal conditions, including guys like Collins who basically haven’t even allowed QB pressure while playing thus year and was ranked as the best OL this year, while Romo had a journeyman Columbo who was average at bet his whole career.

How exactly is it being anal to point out that Tony Romo never saw any real game action in his second year in the league?

 

[G2]

The funny thing about @erod saying stats don't matter is that that's all he used to throw around. Now that Dak has matched or surpassed every benchmark he set he has devolved to the eye test.

erod has a seeing eye dog

 

[Blackrain]

Fixed it.

The dumbest thing about these debates is people comparing Romo in his prime to a guy that's now in his 4th year.

Thank you the comparisons should start after Daks career is over or he has 10 yrs in

Why not let it play out we didnt use a high draft pick on either player so both have given us good value so far

Their styles are vastly different so lets see over the course of time what style proves successful . Whats the hurry to compare. We have been making the playoffs which with this coaching staff is an accomplishment in itself
Lets see how it plays out

 

[G2]

Romo had a HOF coach.

 

[408Cowboy]

Romo was a great QB. I was a huge fan. But it's laughable how those that hate Dak have desperately tried to twist the narrative into Romo having no offensive help at all. It's completely false. He had solid offensive talent around him just about every season.

If you're talking about defensive help, I'd agree wholeheartedly. 2009 was probably the only legitimately good defense Romo ever had (2007 as alright). However, Dak really hasn't had any help in that regard either. I see Dak as a quarterback showing great improvement and on track or even ahead of the curve for where you'd want a 4th year QB to be. He's not a finished product like Romo was in 2014, but even Romo himself wasn't until then.

See this is where they lose it. By ignoring the fact that he had no defensive help especially in the later years they prop him up as a saviour figure. By doing that they discredit what he did have. It's mind boggling. How do you ignore a factual narrative and create a false one at the same time?