Romo worshipers, don't bust an artery, but what if the Cowboys are 9-1?

[plasticman]

Some of you get it.....it's a great problem to have!

You start Romo if he's healthy enough, no question.

In the off season you trade Weeden for high picks. He's too old to be the future at QB.

You use the high picks to move up and get the QB of the future. He can back up Romo for a couple of years.

And it can happen! If guys like Jim Plunket, Trent Dilfer, and Doug Williams can revive their careers with a different team and win Super Bowls then Weeden certainly could. Hopefully he won't have to with the Cowboys.

Why in the world would I not want Tony Romo's story to have the ultimate happy ending a LA John Elway....back to back championships in his final years?

 

[DallasEast]

You know, if Weeden turns into Dan Marino while Tony is out, it will be front-page news around the world. We'll just deal with it the best we can.

Weeden will become the next celebrity spokesperson for NZT-48 if that happens.

 

[DallasEast]

Some of you get it.....it's a great problem to have!

You start Romo if he's healthy enough, no question.

In the off season you trade Weeden for high picks. He's too old to be the future at QB.

You use the high picks to move up and get the QB of the future. He can back up Romo for a couple of years.

And it can happen! If guys like Jim Plunket, Trent Dilfer, and Doug Williams can revive their careers with a different team and win Super Bowls then Weeden certainly could. Hopefully he won't have to with the Cowboys.

Why in the world would I not want Tony Romo's story to have the ultimate happy ending a LA John Elway....back to back championships in his final years?

If you combined your OP with this one, it would be one big ol' trainwreck.

 

[Bungarian]

I am putting everyone that starts these threads on ignore.

 

[iceberg]

If you combined your OP with this one, it would be one big ol' trainwreck.

no combination necessary, DE.

choo choo

 

[tyke1doe]

it's agenda ridden by the mere headline.

ergo, stupid.

So if it didn't include the phrase "Romo Worshiper" would it have been an acceptable hypothetical topic?

 

[adamknite]

"romo worshippers"

"paranoid condemnation"

It's hard to have a civil discussion when your initial question is laced with passive aggressive insults towards the people you are supposedly asking the question to.

 

[tyke1doe]

No one is offended at least none that I could see. But calling folks Romo Worshipers is stupid, which should lead to stupid responses.

And the reality for me is nobody believes in Weeden like they believe in Romo. You don't have to be in love with Romo to think that Weeden won't be able to hold down the fort till Romo is healthy.

I understand all that you said and articulated as much, which is why I said he didn't help himself with the phrase "Romo Worshipers."

Having said that, the underlying issue, at least to me, is does a backup playing for an injured quarterback and performing exceptionally lose his position when the starter returns?
Yes, no one believes Weeden will ever do such, but is it too much to consider the "what if" possibility? It's not like we don't have threads or endless arguments containing similar "what if" scenarios.

 

[tyke1doe]

"romo worshippers"

"paranoid condemnation"

It's hard to have a civil discussion when your initial question is laced with passive aggressive insults towards the people you are supposedly asking the question to.

Yep. He definitely should have culled those phrases from his hypothetical scenario.

 

[jday]

Yes, I'm about to commit blasphemy.....

Just imagine that the Cowboys are 9-1, perhaps even 10-0, by the time Tony Romo can get back on the field. Brandon Weeden is the top rated QB in the league, the Cowboys have the #1 offense and they are on a roll, an inevitable collision course with Super Bowl 5X.

Their next game is Thanksgiving against the Carolina Panthers, 8-2, and the 2nd best record in the NFC behind the Cowboys. Homefield advantage for the playoffs could very well depend on the outcome of this game.

Weeden's rise has been the story of this season....

Do you sit him and start Tony Romo, fresh from an injury, his ability to perform at his typical level in question?

Suppose Weeden continues to excel?

Notice, I never said that Tony Romo would perform poorly, I never said that he wouldn't perform like an All Pro future Hall o Famer. I'm just suggesting that his abilities would be unknown due to the effects of the injury, still not completely healed, he could perhaps be a tad rusty.

If Weeden leads the Cowboys to a Super Bowl, heck, just mentioning the possibility.....

Would that be a good thing or a bad thing for you Romo worshipers.

And am I officially a hater for daring to dream that Weeden might actually perform at a very high level with this offense?

Let the paranoid condemnation begin.....

I might consider giving Romo more time to come back to make sure he is ready considering it's not crucial for him to come back, but at the end of the day, Romo is still the starter I roll with going into the playoffs.

 

[adamknite]

Yep. He definitely should have culled those phrases from his hypothetical scenario.

It's indeed an interesting (albeit unlikely) thought otherwise.

Could have made for a fun little discussion if not for that.

 

[DTown214]

This might sound crazy but I'd rather take my chances with Romo as our quarterback than going with Weeden, even if you could see into the future and guarantee that Weeden would take us to the super bowl.

 

[iceberg]

Some of you get it.....it's a great problem to have!

You start Romo if he's healthy enough, no question.

In the off season you trade Weeden for high picks. He's too old to be the future at QB.

You use the high picks to move up and get the QB of the future. He can back up Romo for a couple of years.

And it can happen! If guys like Jim Plunket, Trent Dilfer, and Doug Williams can revive their careers with a different team and win Super Bowls then Weeden certainly could. Hopefully he won't have to with the Cowboys.

Why in the world would I not want Tony Romo's story to have the ultimate happy ending a LA John Elway....back to back championships in his final years?

cause you're not a "worshiper" and are suddenly having to defend an easily spotted agenda?

bye, felicia.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Only QB in the league I'd take straight up over Romo is Rodgers, and I'd even hesitate to do that because I want to see Romo win more than I do Rodgers. So unless Weeden is on par with Rodgers (same age too), the answer to your question is No.

 

[tyke1doe]

This might sound crazy but I'd rather take my chances with Romo as our quarterback than going with Weeden, even if you could see into the future and guarantee that Weeden would take us to the super bowl.

Interestingly enough, if you stretch the scenario, this is a dilemma the Cowboys faced in 1991 when Aikman got injured and Steve Beuerlein took over quarterback duties. Sitting at 6-5, the Cowboys played the then undefeated Commanders. Aikman got hurt in the first half of the game. Beuerlein enters and helps the Cowboys secure the win (a game in which John Madden said it was the best coach game he had ever seen.) The Beuerlein-led Cowboys ripped off four more wins to enter the post-season with an 11-5 record. The Cowboys dispatched the Bears (17-13) at Soldier Stadium and faced the Lions.
The debate before the game was whether the Cowboys should ride the hot hand with Beurelein or go with the now-healed-but-rusty Aikman. The choice was Aikman. The Cowboys got blown out, but that had more to do with the secondary than Aikman.
I recall Jimmy Johnson vowing to get himself some secondary help the next year. He did (Darren Woodson was part of the 92 draft class), and the rest is history.

But back to the theme of this thread, I can't remember the rationale, but I believe the Cowboys chose Aikman because he was the established leader and had the better upside.

I don't know of any backup who has replaced an injured starter once the starter was healed except for Brady when Bledsoe went down to injury.

Then again, Brady hadn't established who he was or what he could do in the starter's role. Unfortunately, Weeden has, and it hasn't been good.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

No, not blasphemy. Just stupidity.

 

[WoodysGirl]

I understand all that you said and articulated as much, which is why I said he didn't help himself with the phrase "Romo Worshipers."

Having said that, the underlying issue, at least to me, is does a backup playing for an injured quarterback and performing exceptionally lose his position when the starter returns?
Yes, no one believes Weeden will ever do such, but is it too much to consider the "what if" possibility? It's not like we don't have threads or endless arguments containing similar "what if" scenarios.

Yes, because of the individuals involved.

 

[tyke1doe]

Some of you get it.....it's a great problem to have!

You start Romo if he's healthy enough, no question.

In the off season you trade Weeden for high picks. He's too old to be the future at QB.

You use the high picks to move up and get the QB of the future. He can back up Romo for a couple of years.

And it can happen! If guys like Jim Plunket, Trent Dilfer, and Doug Williams can revive their careers with a different team and win Super Bowls then Weeden certainly could. Hopefully he won't have to with the Cowboys.

Why in the world would I not want Tony Romo's story to have the ultimate happy ending a LA John Elway....back to back championships in his final years?

If we recognize that Weeden is too old, why would any franchise not led by a clone of the late George Allen trade high draft picks for Weeden?

 

[tyke1doe]

Yes, because of the individuals involved.

So it's the individual and not the topic?

 

[DallasEast]

I think 31 NFL head coaches would read the what if scenario and just laugh and laugh. Chip Kelly would think about it long and hard but that's just Chip being Chip.