Was Romo's Career "Wasted"?

MichaelWinicki said:
Agreed.

Folks ignore the fact that the Dak led Cowboy offense scored more points in 2016 vs. the Packers than the Romo led Cowboy offense vs. the Packers in 2014.

Cowboys losing to the Packers in 2016 wasn't due to Dak Prescott staring and Tony Romo not starting.
Click to expand...

LOL, this is incredibly disingenuous, and if you are being serious, I just have to shake my head. If you actually consider the situations, I have a tough time taking that performance over most of Tony's playoff performances. I can't recall a time when Tony's performance was matched by halftime the following week of the playoffs in similar situations.
 
Last edited:
An undrafted free agent takes over for America's Team and holds the reigns for over a decade. He leads the team to some division titles and playoff games. He became the franchise leader in several categories, including yards and touchdowns. He made a ton of money and became a household name for good and bad reasons. He left it all on the field. I do not consider his effort wasted at all.

Howver, I feel the team failed to give him a quality OL for the majority of his career. Also, our D was mediocre at best much of the time. Because of this, Romo seems to have forced more, causing more mistakes. When you can't trust the D to hold the other team, you take more chances to try to secure victory. For Romo it bit him in and the team in the backside.
 
Gator88 said:
LOL, this is incredibly disingenuous, and if you are being serious, I just have to shake my head. If you actually consider the situations, I have a tough time taking that performance over most of Tony's playoff performances. I can't recall a time when Tony's performance was matched by halftime the following week of the playoffs in similar situations.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Tony's ah..playoff record speaks for its self. When Prescott is done..he will make you forget all about Tony's puny playoff record.
 
NotForLong said:
This was my point. We built this team for him. We were in the playoffs. We had Romo. Tony frickin Romo. And we went with a rookie.

Dak struggled 1st 2 possesions but played admirably. This team was built for 2016. Everyone else was zigging while we were zagging. Smith Leary Fred. Martin Elliot Beasley Bryant. Come on .

We were a mismatch. Elliott as great as he was considering the advantage he had in that line. He still had a HUGE disadvantage The opposing defences only had to cover 18 yds.

I told everyone all year. Wait and see if Romo gets in our 2nd wr will score. Boom Romo comes in and 2 td. (THIS TEAM WAS BUILT FOR HIM)

Come everyone the euphoria is over.Admit it:

How could a rookie with 16 games of NFL experience. How could you possibly expect him to be better then Romo in a playoff game against a team (Packers) Romo wanted and craved revenge against. The performance would have been epic.

Play action alone would have been a thing of beauty. He would have cut them up.
(SEE ABOVE: DAKS ADVANTAGES)

Only perceived disadvantage of Romo was he will get hurt. (we were in the playoffs 1 and done)

It was sad the situation all became a popularity contest. People took this oportunity to kick him to the curb in favor of the future and what seemed like the present as well. But it was an illusion playoffs are for stars and a grizzled vetern like Rodgers was gonna take the game into his own hands and he did. (We blame the defense because they couldnt contain a legend REALLY thats what the playoffs are made for, and we had a legend on our rostor)

The sober fans amongst us new Romo was our best chance. But we were chastized and forced to defend our point of view which would morph into us being "Dak Haters" and "Romo Lovers"

No we were just not as gullable and delusional to believe we had a better chance with a Rookie

Even now what is done is done and we cant prove a what if. But if the question is what wasted. I say last year was wasted.

This team was built for Romo. Dak was only a place holder.
Click to expand...
Let it go bro, what is done is done..................I personally think Romo should have been given his job back once he was healthy because I believe you do not lose your job to injury, but that is just me. I will say this...............

Anybody that though we were going to win a Championship with a rookie QB, a feat never done before in the NFL, was chugging the cool aid like crazy.
 
Gator88 said:
LOL, this is incredibly disingenuous, and if you are being serious, I just have to shake my head. If you actually consider the situations, I have a tough time taking that performance over most of Tony's playoff performances. I can't recall a time when Tony's performance was matched by halftime the following week of the playoffs in similar situations.
Click to expand...

It was tongue-in-cheek for all those that say Tony would have won that game... And offer nothing substantial to support their position.
 
ShiningStar said:
if you are assuming money was his only intent. I dont believe money was everything to Tony.
Click to expand...
Nah, I'm not assuming money was his only intent. He accomplished a lot being an UDFA. That's pretty much all that I was saying. Oh, and he got PAID!
 
Cowboysfan917 said:
Totally agree. Or what if Romo was in New England
Click to expand...

Romo in New England = Super Bowl victories. Of that I have no doubt. As many as Brady? Who knows? But he definitely would have gotten Lombardis on that team. It's a team sport. We can go back in time too. What if Landry had had Archie Manning instead of Staubach and Staubach had been on those 70s New Orleans teams? I have no doubt we would have won a Super Bowl or two with Manning, and Staubach, as talented as he was, would not have been able to elevate those atrocious Saint teams to a championship, and probably not even to the playoffs.
 
Alexander said:
They made a good point on NFLN, right or wrong, the greats are known for being the players playing the most important position on the field who dragged flawed teams across the goal line on their backs. Everybody can revise to fit how they want that concept to hang.
Click to expand...
So Dan Fouts wasn't great? Dan Marino not great? Fran Tarkenton? Jim Kelly? I could go on and on but sometimes there are just too many weakneses for even a great QB to overcome. Why don't we judge a baseball players' greatness on World Series wins? The Super Bowl ring requirement drives me nuts when we talk about a players' legacy. And isn't it also unfair that this ring requirement only pertains to quarterbacks?
 
Romo kept the Cowboys relevant during his tenure and the Cowboys also became the #1 sports franchise in the world. So it was not a waste to the organization and JJ.

I sure would have loved to see some playoffs success but all in all not a waste.

It's Dak's show now, hoping for lots of success in the playoffs during his career.

Go Cowboys!
:flagwave:
 
MichaelWinicki said:
It was tongue-in-cheek for all those that say Tony would have won that game... And offer nothing substantial to support their position.
Click to expand...
That's fair, while it wouldn't be hard for him to outperform what Dak did, whether that turns into a win or not isn't a sure thing.
 
haleyrules said:
Interesting. Tony's ah..playoff record speaks for its self. When Prescott is done..he will make you forget all about Tony's puny playoff record.
Click to expand...
When football becomes just 2 QBs in a passing competition, I'll treat team results as QB prestige. While football still has 22 starters, I'll look at things as they are, which means Dak has a ways to go to get to where Romo last was.
 
The sad part here Dak will experience the same with our pathetic Defense,he has to carry this team with Zeke and this Defense will not get better any time soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 138 more.
Total: 4,955 (members: 238, guests: 4,717)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,613
Messages
13,822,025
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top