Video: Vintage Romo

[Mobinvans]

Jerry wasted Romos career.

If we would have had a halfway decent defense we could have gone somewhere

 

[DFWJC]

Well when my grandfather passes and I build a man cave I will have this framed lol

why would you do that?

 

[SultanOfSix]

I don't care Tony's teams were good enough to win a SB. They WERE good enough to win games to extend the season further and neglected to do so. That's the issue I have and whether I, you, or anyone else thinks they would have won the following week is irrelevant.

Yes, I watched the Minnesota game. I hate this question, BTW. It has become the one of the laziest and easily predictable response on the internet if there is a difference of opinion. Let's recap, you claim Romo never won because the defense. I retort saying when the rubber meets the road, the offense has sucked too and those games weren't all on the defense. You respond by talking about how the offensive line put up a stinker and questioning whether I watched the game. LOL. The Minnesota game helps prove my point that. The offense stunk, turned the ball over multiple times and left the defense out to dry that game. We didn't fail to win that year because "Tony never had a defense". We failed to win because Minnesota kicked our butts.

Tony didn't fail to win in 2006 because the defense sucked. He failed to win because we couldn't beat Seattle to advance whose offense only scored 19 points. Tony had ball in hand with opportunity to win game late in 4th.
Tony didn't fail to win in 2007 because the defense sucked. He failed to win because we couldn't beat NY who only scored 21 points. Tony had ball in hand late in game with opportunity to win game.
Tony didn't fail to win in 2008 because the defense sucked. He failed because Philly kicked out butts. The defense could have pitched a shut out and we still would have lost just by the points our offense allowed their defense to score on us.
Tony didn't fail to win in 2011 solely because the defense sucked. He failed because both the offense and defense sucked against NY in week 17 and couldn't advance.
Tony didn't fail to win in 2012 because the defense sucked. He failed because we couldn't beat Washington in week 17. Tony had ball in hand late in 4th quarter with opportunity to win the game.
Tony didn't fail to win in 2014 solely because the defense sucked. He failed because we couldn't beat Green Bay. Tony had ball in hand late in 4th quarter to take the lead. We may have ultimately lost, but we couldn't reclaim lead.

Did you watch those games? Now, I'm not "blaming" Romo for the loses. But the claims that he couldn't win because the defense are false. We could have won but just DIDN'T win. There were opportunities there.

Now, in 2016 we had the #4 scoring defense in the league during the regular season. That didn't help one iota in the playoff game. The defense got TORCHED that game. I bring that up because when the season comes down to "win or go home" it doesn't matter how the team performed. Romo's defenses sucked some times. But that doesn't mean they were horrible when the season was on the line.

High level blaming of the defense for Romo's failures is trying to sugar coat what actually happened. The entire team failed, not just the defense.

I didn't claim any of what you said. I said he failed to win primarily because of the bad (I never said "sucky") defenses he had and also the offensive line being poor for so many years. Even in the video I posted I mentioned the latter. Two of his years where he was the starting QB the Cowboys organization had historically bad defenses. I said even in 2006 and 2014 which were the best teams he belonged to, the defenses weren't better than average. In 2006, they literally gave up a TD at the end of the half in less than a minute. Typically, Super Bowl winners have at least solid, top ten defenses. If they don't, then their offenses are either the best in the league or near the best. You need to read what someone writes more carefully.

 

[DFWJC]

Romo threw the game winning TD to Murray after he hurt his back. He was tough as nails.

And he even did something similar to SF with a punctured lung and broken ribs. They due was tough.

I'll never be one to not recognize that he had some bad games. I just don't get those who recall every mistake and magnify them 10 fold vs all the great plays.

 

[Aviano90]

Our records when Romo was QB for most of the season were
10-6
13-3
9-7
11-5
8-8
8-8
8-8 (8-7 but then missed week 17)
12-4

I'm not sure if you're one of them (you seem brighter than that, so I'll assume not) but I've never understood why people thought we were mainly 8-8 with him.
5 winning season
3 .500 season ...
never one losing season

8-8 was the very worst

That's not the point I am trying to make. The claim I am disputing is "Romo never won because of the defense". So, view my response from that angle, because that's the point I am disputing.

Let me present a hypothetical situation here. Let's say were were 9-7 and made a run to the Super Bowl just like the Giants were able to do. Let' even say the defense was horrible in the playoff games leading up to the SB giving up an average of 35 points a game and Romo had to play lights out to score 38 points a game to keep us advancing.

We get to the SB and the defense plays lights out holding a high powered NE offense to 17 points but the offense put up a stinker of a game, turning the ball over 3 times, only scoring 6 points.

Would the reason Romo didn't win the SB be because the defense sucked?

That's essentially what is occurring now. The offense was the strength of the team, the defense was the weakness of the team for much of the regular season. BUT when we got to our "do or die" situations that determined if our season would continue, the defense wasn't as horrible. They typically stepped their game up. They weren't great but the offense typically under performed. When that occurs, you can't just say, "well we didn't win because the defense sucked". Them sucking weeks before didn't prevent them from playing well enough for our Top 10 offense to be able pull games out and keep seasons alive.

That's all I am trying to say.

 

[DFWJC]

I didn't claim any of what you said. I said he failed to win primarily because of the bad defenses he had and also the offensive line being poor for so many years. Even in the video I posted, I said that. Two of his years where he was the starting QB the Cowboys organization had historically bad defenses. I said even in 2006 and 2014 which were the best teams he belonged to, the defenses weren't better than average. In 2006, they literally gave up a TD at the end of the half in less than a minute. Typically, Super Bowl winners have at least solid, top ten defenses. If they don't, then their offenses are either the best in the league or near the best. You need to read what someone writes more carefully.

I think 2007 was the best all-around team.
They weren't clicking late in the year and TO was hurt during the playoffs, but that team was well-balanced.

 

[Aviano90]

I didn't claim any of what you said. I said he failed to win primarily because of the bad (I never said "sucked") defenses he had and also the offensive line being poor for so many years. Even in the video I posted I mentioned the latter. Two of his years where he was the starting QB the Cowboys organization had historically bad defenses. I said even in 2006 and 2014 which were the best teams he belonged to, the defenses weren't better than average. In 2006, they literally gave up a TD at the end of the half in less than a minute. Typically, Super Bowl winners have at least solid, top ten defenses. If they don't, then their offenses are either the best in the league or near the best. You need to read what someone writes more carefully.

It doesn't matter if they had historically bad defenses when you get into a do or die game. At that point it boils down to how they play in THAT game. In order to win a SB, you have to play do or die games. JVille had a great defense but it got torched by Pittsburgh this year. Their offense needed to step up and put a big number on the score.

Now, I would agree with your point if the defense just got rolled most of the time and the offense played good but couldn't overcome the bad defense. That's not what actually happened though. That's why I don't agree we can just say "It's the defenses fault".

 

[3rd_n_inches]

why would you do that?

My Grandfather is a truck driver carries the generators for NBC Sunday night and Thursday night football I would say for the past 12 years or so. He runs cables on the sideline with the camera crew as well. 70 years old and still manages it. Been to like 4 superbowls including the last one and a few pro bowls. He has kept literally everything involved with that such as the picture with Romo and the botched FG with the field pass next to it. I plan on framing a lot of it more to do with his memory. If he didn’t have the field pass next to the newspaper article I wouldn’t care to frame it.

 

[SultanOfSix]

It doesn't matter if they had historically bad defenses when you get into a do or die game. At that point it boils down to how they play in THAT game. In order to win a SB, you have to play do or die games. JVille had a great defense but it got torched by Pittsburgh this year. Their offense needed to step up and put a big number on the score.

Now, I would agree with your point if the defense just got rolled most of the time and the offense played good but couldn't overcome the bad defense. That's not what actually happened though. That's why I don't agree we can just say "It's the defenses fault".

Of course it matters. If you have a historically bad defense, the chances that the team is going to lose increase no matter who the QB is.

I don't understand what your point is. This team didn't win anything that mattered not because Tony wasn't good enough. It didn't win anything because the organization failed him and most GMs would agree. Tony was talented enough to win a Super Bowl. Parcells, Payton, Shanahan, etc., they all knew it and this organization blew it. Even Jerry knows he blew it.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

It doesn't matter if they had historically bad defenses when you get into a do or die game. At that point it boils down to how they play in THAT game. In order to win a SB, you have to play do or die games. JVille had a great defense but it got torched by Pittsburgh this year. Their offense needed to step up and put a big number on the score.

Now, I would agree with your point if the defense just got rolled most of the time and the offense played good but couldn't overcome the bad defense. That's not what actually happened though. That's why I don't agree we can just say "It's the defenses fault".

lol, I can’t believe someone would say something so stupid as the defense can play however they want up until the made up “do or die” game. In 2013 for example, the Cowboys gave up over 6600(!) yards in the entire season. I don’t know, maybe if you don’t give up 51, 49, 45 and 37 points in losses you won’t have to win some imaginary “do or die” game. I mean, seriously what an idiotic thing to say.

 

[KJJ]

Jerry wasted Romos career.

If we would have had a halfway decent defense we could have gone somewhere

We had a halfway decent defense in 2007 it was ranked 9th. Romo’s game which had been stellar for most of that season started to unwind in December. He was having an amazing November but his game started coming apart in December/January. Our offense which had been averaging around 32 points a game dropped to around 14 points a game. We went into a swoon late in the year and limped into the playoffs. While we were coming down the Giants were moving up.

We didn’t give up that many points to the Giants in the playoffs and Eli didn’t pass for many yards but we couldn’t stop them on third down and our passing offense continued to sputter. Romo simply wasn’t sharp. Yes Crayton had a couple of mistakes but Romo was off and we couldn’t make critical stops with the game on the line. When the playoffs arrive we’re never the same team we were through most of the regular season. We never seem to peak at the right time. That’s been the sad story for years.

 

[Aviano90]

Of course it matters. If you have a historically bad defense, the chances that the team is going to lose increase no matter who the QB is.

I don't understand what your point is. This team didn't win anything that mattered not because Tony wasn't good enough. It didn't win anything because the organization failed him and most GMs would agree. Tony was talented enough to win a Super Bowl. Parcells, Payton, Shanahan, etc., they all knew it and this organization blew it. Even Jerry knows he blew it.

No, Tony was good enough to win those games, he just didn't. Not that he couldn't, not that he could never, not that he didn't have the ability. The team was more than capable of winning the games they lost, they just happened to NOT win. Romo was too good of a player for us not to have been able to win. Even when we had "bad defenses" we were able to hang with the best teams in the league most times. We had a few games were we were totally outclassed, but normally we were right there, so the ability to win existed.

My point is that we can't use a blanket statement that Romo didn't have a chance because the defense wasn't good. It's sounds good, it sounds logical. If that is the case Eli shouldn't have been winning because those defenses weren't great. Except, when they got to the do or die games, their defense stepped up their game and played well, giving their offense opportunities to win games and they capitalized. The Giants defense sucking in the regular season didn't matter. But when our defense out performed their normal level of play when the season was on the line and the offense didn't play well, the defense still gets blamed.

 

[aria]

The "past" is all we got left now, so reminiscing about the "good old days" is what we have been reduced to.

What else is there to talk about? How Dallas is the only team in the NFL to not sign a single free agent this year (it was Dallas and Pitt, but Pitt just signed Bostic from the Colts). Or how about lets discuss how close the team is to winning a title since we have had nothing but deep playoff runs lately, lol. Or how about lets talk about Garrett finally getting this team over the hump and winning that elusive 2nd playoff game that is as rare in these parts as wild dingoes, lol.

Sounds good. Free agents can be vastly over rated and I think most people here are over reacting. Every year it’s the same story, people sit around moaning and groaning about not signing anyone and think the teams that do are automatically better. By the time the regular season is over, most of those teams that signed a bunch of FA’s aren’t nearly as better as most people thought they would be at the beginning of the season. Philthy has been an excception.

 

[G2]

lol, I can’t believe someone would say something so stupid as the defense can play however they want up until the made up “do or die” game. In 2013 for example, the Cowboys gave up over 6600(!) yards in the entire season. I don’t know, maybe if you don’t give up 51, 49, 45 and 37 points in losses you won’t have to win some imaginary “do or die” game. I mean, seriously what an idiotic thing to say.

So what you're saying is that you don't understand his point?

 

[Aviano90]

lol, I can’t believe someone would say something so stupid as the defense can play however they want up until the made up “do or die” game. In 2013 for example, the Cowboys gave up over 6600(!) yards in the entire season. I don’t know, maybe if you don’t give up 51, 49, 45 and 37 points in losses you won’t have to win some imaginary “do or die” game. I mean, seriously what an idiotic thing to say.

Yeah, sure is idiotic. LOL But, Kyle Orton had the ball in his hands late in the 4th quarter down only 2. We only need to drive down and kick a field goal to win and get to the playoffs. He threw an interception. It's our defenses fault, right?

The year before, our horrible defense only allowed 21 points, made a couple of stops in the 4th quarter and put the ball in Romo's hands with just under 2 minutes to go. We needed a FG to tie the game and a touchdown to win the game. Romo threw an interception on the very first play giving the Commanders the ball inside the red zone. That's the defense's fault, right?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Jerry wasted Romos career.

If we would have had a halfway decent defense we could have gone somewhere

You can argue Romo wasted Jerry's career and money.

 

[Aviano90]

So what you're saying is that you don't understand his point?

He can't understand anything other than extreme praise for Romo. He's a tool

 

[G2]

He can't understand anything other than extreme praise for Romo. He's a tool

common theme

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Yeah, sure is idiotic. LOL But, Kyle Orton had the ball in his hands late in the 4th quarter down only 2. We only need to drive down and kick a field goal to win and get to the playoffs. He threw an interception. It's our defenses fault, right?

The year before, our horrible defense only allowed 21 points, made a couple of stops in the 4th quarter and put the ball in Romo's hands with just under 2 minutes to go. We needed a FG to tie the game and a touchdown to win the game. Romo threw an interception on the very first play giving the Commanders the ball inside the red zone. That's the defense's fault, right?

It was idiotic and you know it. Come on now. Don’t embarrass yourself any further.
Now your most recent response to SultanOfSix, that was fine. I agree with every word of that.

 

[Aviano90]

It was idiotic and you know it. Come on now. Don’t embarrass yourself any further.
Now your most recent response to SultanOfSix, that was fine. I agree with every word of that.

It's only idiotic because it doesn't fit the narrative that Romo never had a chance because of the defense. He did have a chance because the defense normally played well enough for us to win and extend our season.