News: This stretch can help decide if Cowboys' Tony Romo jumps from good to great

[DallasEast]

You win together but you lose together as well.

100% true but accolades and criticism do not coincide with that reality. All players on a team should be scrutinized for how well they executed their assignments to produce wins. Likewise, every player's efforts throughout a game should be examined and determine what they did not do to prevent a loss. The same principles apply for how well or poorly coaches apply their gameplans. Even so this common sense approach is more often not followed than followed.

 

[5Stars]

Football has been, is, and always shall be a team sport.

Teams win games, even championships, when everyone executes their assignments. Teams enjoy success even if a teammate stumbles but another teammate rises to the occasion. Romo rises to the occasion most of the time but some of his teammates have stumbled along the way. Some people don't admit this. Others cannot comprehend this.

David Tyree can superhumanly stick a football to the top of his helmet and keep a Super Bowl winning drive going. Some people proclaim and understand that's all about Eli Manning.

Faced with the opponent on his one-yard line, Malcolm Butler intercepts Russell Wilson and makes one of the greatest defensive plays in Super Bowl history. Let me say it again. Super. Bowl. H-i-s-t-o-r-y. I had to say it twice because all some people remember and recognize is Tom Brady winning a fourth Super Bowl for New England.

Tony Romo? Oh.

Romo lost the divisional game against the Giants. All of his teammates rose to the occasion. Like Jacques Reeves. Eli Manning didn't rape Reeves' pass coverage to drive down the field in less than a 45-second span before halftime to tie the game 14-14 in a game Dallas lost by four points. That didn't happen. Reeves rose to the occasion. That loss is primarily on Romo (wink wink).

Romo lost the divisional game against the Vikings. All of his teammates rose to the occasion. Like the offensive line. Minnesota's defense didn't have Romo running around like his head was cut off, buying time they wouldn't allow him to cash in to pass, and sacking him six times. That didn't happen. The offensive line provided good-to-great protection all game. That loss is primarily on Romo (wink wink).

Romo lost the divisional game against the Packers. All of his teammates rose to the occasion. Like DeMarco Murray. Julius Peppers didn't stretch in desperation at the ball Murray held SUPERBLY as he was running through a massive hole created by the offensive line, stripped Murray and ended either a huge gain or touchdown run that could've increased Dallas' lead. That didn't happen. Murray rose to the occasion. That loss is primarily on Romo (wink wink).

This stuff cannot be made up. A kindergartener could dissect any game in NFL history and see how teammates on any team have banded together to win games or lose games. School's out for Romo's Dallas Cowboys teams though. Not out for recess. Not out for holiday break. Not out for the semester. The school's condemned. Shut down. Torn down. There's a supermarket sitting where it used to stand and there's some crazy bearded guy yelling through a microphone screaming, "WAKE THE..." Sorry. This is a family forum after all.

Sad. Football is a simple game to understand. Dallas can win these next few games with Romo. Dallas can win a Super Bowl with Romo. Key word is "with." Time for his teammates to step up whether he's balling or he's not. That's how teams succeed. You win together.

Well, some will not read this and agree, I do agree with this.

However, some foolish people will counter that the QB is the most important position on the field so he should be able to win every time! Even if the defense sucks golf balls through a garden hose!

It's those simple minded people that either don't understand the concept of "team", have never played a team sport, or just downright have an agenda that is so transparent that you can see right through them...yet they deny that they dislike Romo.

 

[mattjames2010]

Tony Romo and his Cowboys have only won 2 playoff games, and has never gotten to the conference championship game. That's not playoff success. I'm not blaming Romo for that, but like I said before, it will be held against him regardless of what any of us thinks.

That's not playoff success to you. Playoff success to me is winning playoff games, we have. Getting to a conference championship game or divisional round, same result. We've won playoff games with Romo under center.

And honestly, despite some idiotic beat writers here and there, the tune on Romo has changed. This is changing because more and more people are understanding this is a team sport and pinning losses on a single player is lazy.

It's also tougher to criticize a guy who led the league in both normal quarterback rating and QBR.

 

[DallasEast]

Well, some will not read this and agree, I do agree with this.

However, some foolish people will counter that the QB is the most important position on the field so he should be able to win every time! Even if the defense sucks golf balls through a garden hose!

It's those simple minded people that either don't understand the concept of "team", have never played a team sport, or just downright have an agenda that is so transparent that you can see right through them...yet they deny that they dislike Romo.

[Bold]That argument is one of the most shallow one of all. It gets thrown into football discussions like you mention. My standard counterpoint to it is simple and straightforward:

There was no question of John Elway's Hall of Fame potential coming out of Stanford. He fulfilled that potential by leading the Broncos to three Super Bowl appearances in the first half of his career. Elway and Denver faced outstanding opponents in the Giants and 49ers, along with a strike year Washington team, in those first three Super Bowls. If quarterback talent alone would be enough to win, Elway would have won all three. It didn't happen. It does not work that way in football. You must have a solid team in all four phases: offense, defense, special teams and coaching. And a little luck usually mixes in as well.

People can accept this or not. It's a personal choice but it does not counter what is true.

 

[5Stars]

[Bold]That argument is one of the most shallow one of all. It gets thrown into football discussions like you mention. My standard counterpoint to it is simple and straightforward:

There was no question of John Elway's Hall of Fame potential coming out of Stanford. He fulfilled that potential by leading the Broncos to three Super Bowl appearances in the first half of his career. Elway and Denver faced outstanding opponents in the Giants and 49ers, along with a strike year Washington team, in those first three Super Bowls. If quarterback talent alone would be enough to win, Elway would have won all three. It didn't happen. It does not work that way in football. You must have a solid team in all four phases: offense, defense, special teams and coaching. And a little luck usually mixes in as well.

People can accept this or not. It's a personal choice but it does not counter what is true.

Oh, it can be countered, and it most likely will. It will be countered by posters that have a fear of Romo beating their real team, or they just don't understand and have an agenda, or are just outright stupid!

However, in the event that somehow, someway, if Romo does win a SB? They will want to be the first in line to kiss his ***, maybe...I say maybe not, it will be because of the defense, the coaching, or some other cockeyed lame excuse of why Romo won. Now, it will be because of the "team" Romo was on is why he won.

It's so easy to spot those idiots.

 

[DallasEast]

Oh, it can be countered, and it most likely will. It will be countered by posters that have a fear of Romo beating their real team, or they just don't understand and have an agenda, or are just outright stupid!

However, in the event that somehow, someway, if Romo does win a SB? They will want to be the first in line to kiss his ***, maybe...I say maybe not, it will be because of the defense, the coaching, or some other cockeyed lame excuse of why Romo won. Now, it will be because of the "team" Romo was on is why he won.

It's so easy to spot those idiots.

[Bold] That's exactly the situation I dream Romo would reflect upon and verbalize even though he would never do so because of his considerate nature. In my daydream I see Romo hoisting the Lombardi trophy, turning to the cameras and with that famous gleam in his eye say, "Eat it haters."

The dream of a Super Bowl win may come true but that particular one will not. sigh

 

[Wayne02]

That's not playoff success to you. Playoff success to me is winning playoff games, we have. Getting to a conference championship game or divisional round, same result. We've won playoff games with Romo under center.

And honestly, despite some idiotic beat writers here and there, the tune on Romo has changed. This is changing because more and more people are understanding this is a team sport and pinning losses on a single player is lazy.

It's also tougher to criticize a guy who led the league in both normal quarterback rating and QBR.

I get what you're saying and I agree with you about Romo, that's not the argument. 2 playoff wins in 10 years is not success, sorry, it just isn't. Not getting to at least the conference championship game in 10 years is not playoff success. Is it Romo's fault? No, but that doesn't matter. Is it fair, well fairness is subjective. I don't think it's fair, but as I said before, unless Romo and the Cowboys start having playoff success, meaning more than 2 playoff wins in 10 years, then he will continue to be criticized.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Well, some will not read this and agree, I do agree with this.

However, some foolish people will counter that the QB is the most important position on the field so he should be able to win every time! Even if the defense sucks golf balls through a garden hose!

It's those simple minded people that either don't understand the concept of "team", have never played a team sport, or just downright have an agenda that is so transparent that you can see right through them...yet they deny that they dislike Romo.

1. Romo himself has left atleast one deep playoff run on the table.
2. He has had defenses that were good enough to win.

 

[5Stars]

I get what you're saying and I agree with you about Romo, that's not the argument. 2 playoff wins in 10 years is not success, sorry, it just isn't. Not getting to at least the conference championship game in 10 years is not playoff success. Is it Romo's fault? No, but that doesn't matter. Is it fair, well fairness is subjective. I don't think it's fair, but as I said before, unless Romo and the Cowboys start having playoff success, meaning more than 2 playoff wins in 10 years, then he will continue to be criticized.

Posters like you only criticize Romo because you have tunnel vision for the player. With your logic, Romo or any other QB should be able to go to a losing team like the Raiders for example, and Romo should win a SB. You will never be able to understand a "team". Well, you and some others...

 

[5Stars]

1. Romo himself has left atleast one deep playoff run on the table.
2. He has had defenses that were good enough to win.

Which game did Romo lose?

What defense are you talking about?

 

[Wayne02]

Posters like you only criticize Romo because you have tunnel vision for the player. With your logic, Romo or any other QB should be able to go to a losing team like the Raiders for example, and Romo should win a SB. You will never be able to understand a "team". Well, you and some others...

Something is seriously wrong with you. In what way did I criticize Romo? Get a life my man and stop prowling around on here looking to start an argument.

 

[5Stars]

Something is seriously wrong with you. In what way did I criticize Romo? Get a life my man and stop prowling around on here looking to start an argument.

I'm not prowling around looking to start an argument. I'm just pointing out your foolishness in thinking that Romo or any other QB can win games all by themselves.

 

[mattjames2010]

I get what you're saying and I agree with you about Romo, that's not the argument. 2 playoff wins in 10 years is not success, sorry, it just isn't. Not getting to at least the conference championship game in 10 years is not playoff success. Is it Romo's fault? No, but that doesn't matter. Is it fair, well fairness is subjective. I don't think it's fair, but as I said before, unless Romo and the Cowboys start having playoff success, meaning more than 2 playoff wins in 10 years, then he will continue to be criticized.

Again, what you believe to be playoff success and what I do just seem to differ. What I do know is, when we have made playoffs the last two times, we've won playoff games.

Outside of entertainment value, the "Playoff success" is really just silly arguments anyways. Lose in the wildcard round, divisional round, or conference championship; it's all the same result. You go home, just with a different draft pick.

 

[Wayne02]

I'm not prowling around looking to start an argument. I'm just pointing out your foolishness in thinking that Romo or any other QB can win games all by themselves.

I never said he could win it by himself. I am challenging you sir, to show me where I said if Romo doesn't win these games by himself then it is his fault if the Cowboys lose. Maybe you can't read or you have some kind of Romo complex where if you do anything short of shining his shoes, you call people haters. Ridiculous.

 

[Wayne02]

Again, what you believe to be playoff success and what I do just seem to differ. What I do know is, when we have made playoffs the last two times, we've won playoff games.

Outside of entertainment value, the "Playoff success" is really just silly arguments anyways. Lose in the wildcard round, divisional round, or conference championship; it's all the same result. You go home, just with a different draft pick.

Yes it is the same result, again we pretty much agree on everything except for the playoff success. I don't believe that 2 playoff wins in 10 years is playoff success, and you do.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Which game did Romo lose?

What defense are you talking about?

oh boy

 

[5Stars]

I never said he could win it by himself. I am challenging you sir, to show me where I said if Romo doesn't win these games by himself then it is his fault if the Cowboys lose. Maybe you can't read or you have some kind of Romo complex where if you do anything short of shining his shoes, you call people haters. Ridiculous.

Is it Romo's fault? No, but that doesn't matter. - Wayne02

The hell if it doesn't. It matters what team Romo or any other QB has around them.

 

[5Stars]

oh boy

Remind me...I might agree. But to paint with a broad brush I will not understand what you are talking about. I know Romo is not perfect, but show or guide me to what you were talking about. Which game or which defense. Not this "oh boy" stuff.

 

[Wayne02]

Is it Romo's fault? No, but that doesn't matter. - Wayne02

The hell if it doesn't. It matters what team Romo or any other QB has around them.

In what way does that show me saying that it's Romo's fault? I specifically said in that quote that it's not his fault. It doesn't matter to the people who determine things like legacy and HOF credentials, I wasn't talking about me because nobody cares what me, you, or anyone else on this board thinks.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Remind me...I might agree. But to paint with a broad brush I will not understand what you are talking about. I know Romo is not perfect, but show or guide me to what you were talking about. Which game or which defense. Not this "oh boy" stuff.

Actually, I'm riding the Dallas Cowboys team of dynasty train for the next two years.

I withdraw my replies for the BIG "future" picture