The salad years. What happened?

[TheMarathonContinues]

Your claim is bogus. Your implication is that Romo didn’t elevate his game and that is the reason why the team didn’t win in playoffs. When you control a variable and assert that it is on one person to play well to overcome deficiencies elsewhere you’re effectively saying he didn’t will his team to victory.

Tampa was crap. They barely scraped into the playoffs. I have no idea what Green Bay team you’re even talking about. His rookie year? I don’t even know how you’re measuring “elevating his game”. It’s just something you pulled out of your *** to diminish Romo.

So you believe Romo elevated his game when the playoffs came around?

And what do you mean you don't know what GB team are you a Cowboys fan?

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Those teams are all trash they beat. The point is simple. You need to put your big pants on when the game is on the line. I can’t make it anymore simple then that.

And your the same guy so very proud and boastful "Dak elevated his game against TRASH Tampa"

You've shown yourself to many people you are a fraud. Double standards.... hypocrisy.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

And your the same guy so very proud and boastful "Dak elevated his game against TRASH Tampa"

You've shown yourself to many people you are a fraud. Double standards.... hypocrisy.

And you've shown yourself to be the most sensitive person on this site. Far more sensitive than any Dak homer.

Dak elevated his game against Tampa. Sorry. Sorry that it hurts your feelings but it's facts. There's no way around it.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

And you've shown yourself to be the most sensitive person on this site. Far more sensitive than any Dak homer.

Dak elevated his game against Tampa. Sorry. Sorry that it hurts your feelings but it's facts. There's no way around it.

Okay...so we disagree on something. Not a big deal but you lecture me about "sensitivity".
You think it's epic to "elevate" your game against the worst team to make the playoffs... losers 8-9.
I don't think that qualifies as elevation.

We disagree. You don't have to be such a snowflake winey b about it.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Okay...so we disagree on something. Not a big deal but you lecture me about "sensitivity".
You think it's epic to "elevate" your game against the worst team to make the playoffs... losers 8-9.
I don't think that qualifies as elevation.

We disagree. You don't have to be such a snowflake winey b about it.

You can’t play victim after calling me a fraud.

Go look up the word “elevate”. I can’t educate you on the meeting of words you should know.

 

[SultanOfSix]

So you believe Romo elevated his game when the playoffs came around?

And what do you mean you don't know what GB team are you a Cowboys fan?

You made the claim that Romo did not elevate his game and cost his team by not willing it to victory like other QBs supposedly have done so in the past. You provided no measure for this in comparison to other QBs "elevating" their game and doing so. In other words -- and I will reiterate once again -- you pulled some platitude out of your *** to diminish Romo. Football is the most team game of all of the professional sports, more so than any other since it contains the greatest number of players on a team that play only on a single unit of three. While the QB controls the offensive play the most since he has the ball in his hands on almost every play, he is dependent upon multiple WRs, OLs, TEs, RBs, etc. to do what they are supposed to do and be where they are supposed to be. Also, all members of the offensive unit are also dependent upon how well the defense and special teams play which they have absolutely no control over.

I thought my question was obvious and asked which GB team from what season you were talking about? I didn't presume you were an idiot and would think someone who has been posting on this board for almost twenty years and has followed football since he was eight years old wouldn't know what team exists in Green Bay.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You made the claim that Romo did not elevate his game and cost his team by not willing it to victory like other QBs supposedly have done so in the past. You provided no measure for this in comparison to other QBs "elevating" their game and doing so. In other words -- and I will reiterate once again -- you pulled some platitude out of your *** to diminish Romo. Football is the most team game of all of the professional sports, more so than any other since it contains the greatest number of players on a team that play only on a single unit of three. While the QB controls the offensive play the most since he has the ball in his hands on almost every play, he is dependent upon multiple WRs, OLs, TEs, RBs, etc. to do what they are supposed to do and be where they are supposed to be. Also, all members of the offensive unit are also dependent upon how well the defense and special teams play which they have absolutely no control over.

I thought my question was obvious and asked which GB team from what season you were talking about? I didn't presume you were an idiot and would think someone who has been posting on this board for almost twenty years and has followed football since he was eight years old wouldn't know what team exists in Green Bay.

Did Romo elevate his game when the playoffs came around yes or no? It's a simple question. The fact that you're deflecting says it all.

And you asked me what GB performance. I didn't presume you were an idiot and would think of any other time Dak has played the Packers in the playoffs being it was only one game but ok.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Did Romo elevate his game when the playoffs came around yes or no? It's a simple question. The fact that you're deflecting says it all.

And you asked me what GB performance. I didn't presume you were an idiot and would think of any other time Dak has played the Packers in the playoffs being it was only one game but ok.

It’s a loaded and stupid question. First of all, you never defined what that even measurably means. It’s a dumb platitude that you keep using. It’s like saying Romo didn’t show leadership when it mattered based on something as general as a loss. Second of all, did he need to only elevate his game when the team lost and not when the team won? If it’s the latter, then QED on the loaded question.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It’s a loaded and stupid question. First of all, you never defined what that even measurably means. It’s a dumb platitude that you keep using. It’s like saying Romo didn’t show leadership when it mattered based on something as general as a loss. Second of all, did he need to only elevate his game when the team lost and not when the team won? If it’s the latter, then QED on the loaded question.

It's not a loaded question. There are times when you need a QB to play above his head or play better than he typically does. Will he do it every game? No. He's going to have some stinkers. No NFL team is perfect. There are times where the run game may get stuffed. Or the passing game gets dominated. Or the defense can't get off the field. Was there ever a time where you saw Romo play in the playoffs and thought "Wow he's MONEY TODAY".

On the path to their ring Joe Flacco played above his head. He elevated his game in the SB and posted 287 passing yards 3 touchdowns and no interceptions...

You may find the question stupid because most Romo fans would.

 

[DallasEast]

uh oh. It's attack Romo day today. This makes... wait... how many years has it been since Romo last played for Dallas?

 

[SultanOfSix]

It's not a loaded question. There are times when you need a QB to play above his head or play better than he typically does. Will he do it every game? No. He's going to have some stinkers. No NFL team is perfect. There are times where the run game may get stuffed. Or the passing game gets dominated. Or the defense can't get off the field. Was there ever a time where you saw Romo play in the playoffs and thought "Wow he's MONEY TODAY".

On the path to their ring Joe Flacco played above his head. He elevated his game in the SB and posted 287 passing yards 3 touchdowns and no interceptions...

You may find the question stupid because most Romo fans would.

It is a loaded question. Because it’s based on nothing but your anecdotal BS, vacuous non-wholistic analysis, the fact that you thought Romo should’ve stepped up and played above himself (whatever they even means because you still haven’t defined it) to overcome unquantifiable team deficiencies that occurred elsewhere, and that a team he was on never got far in the playoffs and won a SB.

Posting some stat line by Joe Flacco proves nothing. Flacco has had many games statistically better than that. Where is the elevation in his game? Just because he did that in a SB? What about how his defense or special teams played in the playoffs? How about his running game? What about penalties?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It is a loaded question. Because it’s based on nothing but your anecdotal BS, vacuous non-wholistic analysis, the fact that you thought Romo should’ve stepped up and played above himself (whatever they even means because you still haven’t defined it) to overcome unquantifiable team deficiencies that occurred elsewhere, and that a team he was on never got far in the playoffs and won a SB.

Posting some stat line by Joe Flacco proves nothing. Flacco has had many games statistically better than that. Where is the elevation in his game? Just because he did that in a SB? What about how his defense or special teams played in the playoffs? How about his running game? What about penalties?

Just agree to disagree. You don't even know what "elevate" means and you think it's a loaded question. For whatever reason you seem to be the only person having difficulty understanding this.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Just agree to disagree. You don't even know what "elevate" means and you think it's a loaded question. For whatever reason you seem to be the only person having difficulty understanding this.

Man just hush. I know what elevate generally means. You never qualified it whatsoever in this context not only when it came to Romo but other QBs as well. I pointed out multiple problems with your usage of it as simply a platitude devoid of meaning used non-contextually outside of the team game in general and in the individual games themselves, fundamentally rooted on the fact the teams he was on never accomplished anything in the post season for a myriad of reasons which you selectively ignore. All of the same BS can be applied to even HOF QBs that never did the same.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Man just hush. I know what elevate generally means. You never qualified it whatsoever in this context not only when it came to Romo but other QBs as well. I pointed out multiple problems with your usage of it as simply a platitude devoid of meaning used non-contextually outside of the team game in general and in the gages themselves, and fundamentally rooted on the fact the teams he was on never accomplished anything in the post season for a myriad of reasons. All of the same BS can be applied to even HOF QBs that never did the sane.

Ok. Romo elevated his team and they just failed to deliver. You got it.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Ok. Romo elevated his team and they just failed to deliver. You got it.

You don't seem to know how argumentation works. You made a claim so you have to prove it. I didn't say anything about Romo elevating the team and they failed to deliver.

You claimed that Romo didn't elevate his game, implying in the meaning of this phrase as the overcoming of some nebulous team deficiencies existing elsewhere in order to effectively will the team to victory.

In other words, you setup a circular argument where you presumed the conclusion (the loss) and blamed it on Romo (your claim that he never elevated his game), without defining what it means for any QB and specifically Romo to elevate his game, nor why he was responsible for overcoming deficiencies elsewhere as if that was something other QBs have done, willing their corresponding teams to victory.

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

Anyone who calls Terrance Williams a #4 I just can't rock with them

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You don't seem to know how argumentation works. You made a claim so you have to prove it. I didn't say anything about Romo elevating the team and they failed to deliver.

You claimed that Romo didn't elevate his game, implying in the meaning of this phrase as the overcoming of some nebulous team deficiencies existing elsewhere in order to effectively will the team to victory.

In other words, you setup a circular argument where you presumed the conclusion (the loss) and blamed it on Romo (your claim that he never elevated his game), without defining what it means for any QB and specifically Romo to elevate his game, nor why he was responsible for overcoming deficiencies elsewhere as if that was something other QBs have done, willing their corresponding teams to victory.

Well the problem is you don't know what "elevating" means. So if we can't get past that I don't know how we can "argue" or "debate". And I didn't blame Romo what I said was he wasn't able to overcome the teams issues. Which I thought is not only fair but it's a fact. Romo was not good enough to overcome the issues that plagued the Cowboys.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Well the problem is you don't know what "elevating" means. So if we can't get past that I don't know how we can "argue" or "debate". And I didn't blame Romo what I said was he wasn't able to overcome the teams issues. Which I thought is not only fair but it's a fact. Romo was not good enough to overcome the issues that plagued the Cowboys.

Are you obtuse? I know what "elevating" means. Regardless, it's not my job to figure out what you mean by it since it is your claim and argument. Have you ever heard of the term equivocation? Terms can have multiple meanings, nuances, contexts, etc., that qualify how they are being used. It is your job as the claimant to be explicit in how you are using it.

Wow. No QB (or any player for that matter) can overcome team issues. Well done. You've proven that you hold one particular QB to an impossible standard due to your bias.

You don't even know what you're talking about anymore.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Are you obtuse? I know what "elevating" means. Regardless, it's not my job to figure out what you mean by it since it is your claim and argument. Have you ever heard of the term equivocation? Terms can have multiple meanings, nuances, contexts, etc., that qualify how they are being used. It is your job as the claimant to be explicit in how you are using it.

Wow. No QB can overcome team issues. Well done. You've proved that you hold one particular QB to an impossible standard due to your bias.

You don't even know what you're talking about anymore.

Like I said above, when I asked you do you think Romo elevated this team in the playoffs your brain got overloaded and you said it's a loaded question. So I don't know what else to do here. Its elementary. DISD school elementary.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Like I said above, when I asked you do you think Romo elevated this team in the playoffs your brain got overloaded and you said it's a loaded question. So I don't know what else to do here. Its elementary. DISD school elementary.

How long are you continue being disingenuous? I don’t care whether you asked me that question or not. You made the claim, were called out for it, never clarified what you meant, and then were shown how dumb, biased, loaded, and contradictory it was. But continue to impotently obfuscate through diversion and deflection. It fools no one, especially me.