Romo with more 4th quarter comebacks than Aikman and Staubach?

[Califan007]

Well, you're an outsider, but hardly an unbiased one. It is year 7 of It's Not Romo's Fault, but only because we're also on year seven of Of Course It's All Romo's Fault.

LoL...touche'

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Hmm..well, it's not happening so far. The overwhelming majority of Skins fans whose posts I've been reading all say RG3 needs to learn how to slide earlier and more often, needs to throw the ball away more, needs to understand that he doesn't need to get every inch on every run, etc. The only ones who aren't saying that are saying Shanahan needs to reel him in, not use designed runs and/or scrap the read option altogether.

Wasn't happening the 1st couple of Seasons when Romo was named as starter either. It happens when your fan base forms an opinion that allows for the possibility of failure from a certain player. Particularly your QB. That day has not come with RGIII and it may never come. Some QBs are lucky that way and you don't really see that kind of discussion till the end of their careers.

 

[Califan007]

If we're going in circles it is entirely because you are all over the place. The ONLY point I have made is that Romo is no different than any other QB. You started off with some nonsense about who gets credit for wins and losses. Then jumped from there to why Cowboys fans discuss their favorite team's players. Then you are talking about breaking down INTs and whose fault they are.

Ah, no lol...the ONLY aspect you and I are going in circles about was the propensity for Cowboys fans to over-analyze seemingly all of Romo's INTs.

In response, you first chalked it up to ESPN "rubbish" and said what I've observed was merely Dallas fans responding to it.

When I said I didn't follow what you were saying because fans here didn't need to hear ESPN first before analyzing Romo's INTs, you then claimed that game announcers have done the same thing for 40 years. Which was never argued lol...

So I once again said I wasn't following what you were getting at...that I never disputed (or even mentioned) anything about what game announcers say during games...and reiterated my point: that I've observed Dallas fans analyzing Romo's INTs without needing to hear anything from ESPN first--which was your initial response. See, that was me trying to keep you on your initial point ...

Didn't work, though lol. You again said announcers do it "all the time", and said you couldn't understand why I thought fans shouldn't...which, of course, I never said lol. Soooo....I corrected you, and for the third time reiterated my same point: that I was only talking about CZ members not needing to hear anything from ESPN first before over-analyzing Romo's INT to assign blame for them.

That's not me being "all over the place". That's me repeating and repeating the same point, never varying from it. You, though, first brought up ESPN and their "rubbish", then brought up Cowboys fans merely reacting to it...then mentioned tv announcers also analyzing QBs' INTs...then (lol) said I felt fans shouldn't be analyzing Romo's miscues.

Four different directions you decided to take your responses to my one singular comment and point. Sorry if I confused you.

As for the rest of your post, I haven't read it yet and frankly I'm thinking I may not...I couldn't get past the first paragraph without laughing and saying "Oh, HELL, no" to myself lol ...If I read the rest I know I'll want to respond just as diligently as you have written. So I'll just let you have the last word--whatever those words are. As I said in an earlier post, I don't want to derail this thread.

 

[Califan007]

Wasn't happening the 1st couple of Seasons when Romo was named as starter either. It happens when your fan base forms an opinion that allows for the possibility of failure from a certain player. Particularly your QB. That day has not come with RGIII and it may never come. Some QBs are lucky that way and you don't really see that kind of discussion till the end of their careers.

I guess I honestly don't see how the "conventional fan wisdom" of the Skins' fan base transforms from "RG3 is the reason he gets injured", to "(fill in the blank) is the reason RG3 gets injured" (other than if Shanahan is what the blank is filled in with). He wasn't injured in the pocket, he wasn't injured running the read option, and his injuries weren't due to an accumulation of hits. He just didn't slide sooner. If that continues I imagine the blame will continue to be placed with RG3, as it would appear he's not learning. If he's injured because he was allowed to play when not 100% healthy, that will continue to fall on Shanahan.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I guess I honestly don't see how the "conventional fan wisdom" of the Skins' fan base transforms from "RG3 is the reason he gets injured", to "(fill in the blank) is the reason RG3 gets injured" (other than if Shanahan is what the blank is filled in with). He wasn't injured in the pocket, he wasn't injured running the read option, and his injuries weren't due to an accumulation of hits. He just didn't slide sooner. If that continues I imagine the blame will continue to be placed with RG3, as it would appear he's not learning. If he's injured because he was allowed to play when not 100% healthy, that will continue to fall on Shanahan.

People are not rational. They form attachments to certain ideals and once engrained, they start to formulate support contingencies that are not always accurate. It happens on both sides of any issue. Not to get political and please, lets don't because I will have to ban myself but a very good example of this is probably the Abortion issue. Without getting into details, the point of the example is that both sides are probably closer then you might think if you just listen to the rhetoric. If you get yourself to wrapped up in that, then all of a sudden, you start sounding kind of over the top, if you will. However, if you just take a step back and look at it, you start saying to yourself, 'What the hell was I thinking?" That happens on both sides of the issue and that's kind of how I see things like the Romo discussion and other such topics.

You just get to emotionally invested in a single idea and you start losing perspective I think.

Anyway, that's my two cents on it and now I'll pass the conversation on to others who can add to it.

Again folks, please don't let my post turn this into a political discussion. It was just an example to try and illustrate the point I was trying to make.

Thank you in advance.

ABQ

 

[Califan007]

People are not rational. They form attachments to certain ideals and once engrained, they start to formulate support contingencies that are not always accurate. It happens on both sides of any issue. Not to get political and please, lets don't because I will have to ban myself but a very good example of this is probably the Abortion issue. Without getting into details, the point of the example is that both sides are probably closer then you might think if you just listen to the rhetoric. If you get yourself to wrapped up in that, then all of a sudden, you start sounding kind of over the top, if you will. However, if you just take a step back and look at it, you start saying to yourself, 'What the hell was I thinking?" That happens on both sides of the issue and that's kind of how I see things like the Romo discussion and other such topics.

You just get to emotionally invested in a single idea and you start losing perspective I think.

Anyway, that's my two cents on it and now I'll pass the conversation on to others who can add to it.

Again folks, please don't let my post turn this into a political discussion. It was just an example to try and illustrate the point I was trying to make.

Thank you in advance.

ABQ

Well, true...it could indeed get to a point where fans (Skins fans in this case) spend more time defending their attachments to engrained views than anything else regarding their favorite (and the team's best) player or players. Like you said, things are all unicorns and rainbows now (well, you didn't say that exactly lol)...but let a rough season or two pass by and fans may hang onto their entrenched views as if they were lifejackets in the middle of a stormy sea.

 

[Hostile]

Ah, no lol...

Egads. All QBs get credited for wins, losses, and comeback wins. I'll stand by that. All Qbs get scrutinized on forums dedicated to their team. I'll stand by that. All Qbs throw INTs that aren't on them, but get attributed to them. I'll stand by that. Nothing else interests me enough to continue this. Not once did I ever understand what you think is so different, but it wasn't worth my time to read this, or respond any further, so you can have the last word.

 

[ReturnToGlory]

Aikman started the game prepared to go, from the opening drive! He used to start 9-10 or 10-10 on his first ten throws. No need for comebacks if you start hot and have a good D.
On the other hand, Romo starts slow. Combined with less than dominant D, he's in a position to comeback much more often.

 

[DejectedFan1996]

Aikman started the game prepared to go, from the opening drive! He used to start 9-10 or 10-10 on his first ten throws. No need for comebacks if you start hot and have a good D.
On the other hand, Romo starts slow. Combined with less than dominant D, he's in a position to comeback much more often.

Romo starts slow because of JG, the porous run game/oline, the defense, Jerry Jones and WR's running the wrong routes.

 

[Clove]

Unfortunately for the OP, I don't watch football for the come backs, I watch them to see our team win Super Bowls. Unless you're going to show me evidence of his Super Bowl victories, then I'm not interested. And BTW, just like someone else mentioned, why do you all of a sudden point to the QB a single person when most of you guys talk about team sports? Romo supporters are just flat out lost.

 

[Red Dragon]

Unfortunately for the OP, I don't watch football for the come backs, I watch them to see our team win Super Bowls.

Then why don't you quit watching the Cowboys until about the year 2030 or so.