What if the Coaches want to stick with Dak

[KJJ]

I think the more likely scenario is Jerry wants to stick w Dak and the staff wants to go to Romo

If that's the case then the staff is more incompetent than I've given them credit for.

 

[CowboyRoy]

If you think those 8-8 teams would have won any more than 3 or 4 games without Romo, you're clueless. I mean, embarrassingly clueless.

You were the guy bragging about record. I simply pointed out the error in your argument. I love Romo. I blame Garrett and some talent for those 8-8 years. But if you dont see how great a QB Dak is, then you are certainly as clueless as it gets.

But just for the record, you just apologized for Romo again. You are apologizing for the 8-8 campaigns.

 

[Idgit]

Net negative? LOL

Don't ever compare yourself to me as a poster. Say what you want about my writing style, I am near dead on when it comes to the Cowboys. You don't hold a candle to me as a fan of the boys or as an accurate predictor or analyzer of football.

Are you denying saying that Romo would be 5-0? Or that you insinuated that we lost the Giants game because of Dak? Should I pull it up for you and jog your selective memory?

Oh, my. I know on the field of CZ you fancy yourself the 'Dak Prescott' to my 'Tony Romo,' Roy, but you're not. You're much more the strange kid who keeps showing up at the park with a tin-foil helmet and shoulder pads you made at home out of empty egg cartons who tackles people at in appropriate times and takes the ball and runs around the field with it shouting for other posters to "go long." We have to catch you and send you home for a few days with a reminder that there are rules in public parks, only to have you back the next week, pretending that nothing happened and that you're actually on one of the teams. But nobody on either of the teams really wants you, even as a mercy-pick. They'd rather have the guy with the drop-foot, or the old guy in the back brace. Don't ever compare myself to you as a poster? Who in the world would every want to compare themselves to you as a poster?

And, no, I'm not denying that I said that I have very little doubt Tony would have gotten points on that final Giants drive. You can pull up the quotes, though, to show me where I insinuated we lost the game because of Dak of all things. We lost that game in part because Dez and Beasely dropped TDs and because Williams wasn't unable to get out of bounds in time. Maybe throw in Sean Lee's dropped INT. Playmakers needed to make plays to support the rookie QB in his first start and--like so often last seasoon--they didn't in week one. Which is what I'm sure I said at the time. But by all means, if I said something different and blamed the loss on Dak somehow, job my selective memory for me.

 

[Idgit]

He loves Tony which is why even if we only have 1 loss initially I think he will go back with #9.

Tony's getting his comeback shot. They way Jerry is with loyalty, I can't imagine him not. The only real question is how quick the hook might be if he's not playing up to his usual level of ability.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Oh, my. I know on the field of CZ you fancy yourself the 'Dak Prescott' to my 'Tony Romo,' Roy, but you're not. You're much more the strange kid who keeps showing up at the park with a tin-foil helmet and shoulder pads you made at home out of empty egg cartons who tackles people at in appropriate times and takes the ball and runs around the field with it shouting for other posters to "go long." We have to catch you and send you home for a few days with a reminder that there are rules in public parks, only to have you back the next week, pretending that nothing happened and that you're actually on one of the teams. But nobody on either of the teams really wants you, even as a mercy-pick. They'd rather have the guy with the drop-foot, or the old guy in the back brace. Don't ever compare myself to you as a poster? Who in the world would every want to compare themselves to you as a poster?

And, no, I'm not denying that I said that I have very little doubt Tony would have gotten points on that final Giants drive. You can pull up the quotes, though, to show me where I insinuated we lost the game because of Dak of all things. We lost that game in part because Dez and Beasely dropped TDs and because Williams wasn't unable to get out of bounds in time. Maybe throw in Sean Lee's dropped INT. Playmakers needed to make plays to support the rookie QB in his first start and--like so often last seasoon--they didn't in week one. Which is what I'm sure I said at the time. But by all means, if I said something different and blamed the loss on Dak somehow, job my selective memory for me.

I'm the guy that keeps kicking your butt around the playground. And your the guy that keeps running home to mommy complaining about what a mean guy I am. LOL

When you start getting things right, we can talk. And when is Garrett making the hall of fame again?

Your exact insinuation was "yes we would have won that game with Dak at this point because he has more experience now" Thus your insinuation that we lost because of his inexperience.

When it was more than clear that your hero Garrett played NOT to lose and left Dez out on an island instead of moving him around. And how can we forget the dropped Dez TD and dropped Beasley TD.

This is what I am talking about when I say you have a poor ability to analyze football. And no doubt your analysis that Garrett is one of the best coaches in the NFL has done you no favors.

 

[the_h0wey]

Tony's getting his comeback shot. They way Jerry is with loyalty, I can't imagine him not. The only real question is how quick the hook might be if he's not playing up to his usual level of ability.

Absolutely

 

[Idgit]

I'm the guy that keeps kicking your butt around the playground. And your the guy that keeps running home to mommy complaining about what a mean guy I am. LOL

When you start getting things right, we can talk. And when is Garrett making the hall of fame again?

Your exact insinuation was "yes we would have won that game with Dak at this point because he has more experience now" Thus your insinuation that we lost because of his inexperience.

When it was more than clear that your hero Garrett played NOT to lose and left Dez out on an island instead of moving him around. And how can we forget the dropped Dez TD and dropped Beasley TD.

This is what I am talking about when I say you have a poor ability to analyze football. And no doubt your analysis that Garrett is one of the best coaches in the NFL has done you no favors.

Yeah, you just keep on 'doing you,' I guess. I have little interest in walking you through what was actually said. Cheers.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Yeah, you just keep on 'doing you,' I guess. I have little interest in walking you through what was actually said. Cheers.

Are you denying you said it?

I didnt see you deny you said Romo would be 5-0.

So it appears my reading abilities are just fine.

 

[Idgit]

Are you denying you said it?

I didnt see you deny you said Romo would be 5-0.

So it appears my reading abilities are just fine.

If you'd read the post right after you brought it up, you'd have seen where I said "And, no, I'm not denying that I said that I have very little doubt Tony would have gotten points on that final Giants drive." But, like I say, you don't read the posts you respond to, which is what makes you a net-negative to the board as far as I'm concerned.

As for the Dak/Romo stuff, I'll refer to what I've actually said previously and people can decide for themselves how much I've dissed Dak or how much you're just running around trying to tackle people inappropriately and interrupting the actual discussion.

Here's the post I think you're probably (poorly) referring to, since I was responding to your question in the first place:
"Dak's played beautifully, but Romo's a better QB."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/do-y...ck-with-dak-ended.358512/page-10#post-6871005

Post in thread "Romo wins this game" after Giants week:
"Romo probably does. He's a great QB. But Dak played well today. I got no beef with his performance, and I'm actually relieved to have seen it, because I think we've got our next QB on the roster already."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/romo-wins-this-game.356369/#post-6809745

Here's what I had to say about Tony v. Dak in a bit more detail:
"Dak's got all the potential in the world, and he's on a trajectory to be a great QB in his own right. When Tony comes back after next week, you watch. You're going to hear him say exactly what I'm saying now. There's a lot he can still learn about NFL defenses, and Tony's a great guy to teach him. They're both going to respect each other, both going to be good teammates, and both are going to understand the reality of the situation is that we've got two capable QBs right now for the first time in a long time. The writing is on the wall for Tony, but Dak can afford to be patient, and he can use the time to get better."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/are-...-for-a-mighty-fall.358735/page-2#post-6872989

A recent nod to Dak's improvement re: whether or not I think he'd have won the Giants game playing at the level he's playing at now:
"I totally do. He's gotten much better, for sure."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/dak-is-the-man.358978/page-3#post-6881409

More props for Dak and a hat tip for the QB controversy:
"I get the Dak v. Romo thing with Dak playing so well."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/havi...uge-dez-not-needed.358995/page-3#post-6883699

A summary of my take on the QB situation in a nutshell, from day one:
"At this point, though, I'd prefer to just let it play out and see how much Dak progresses between now and whenever Romo is ready and evaluate the position then."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/lets-do-this-again-dak.358348/page-2#post-6864723​

There you have it. People can decide for themselves whether your reading abilities are 'just fine' or not. I know what I think, and what I think is why I generally try not to make a habit out of responding to your nonsensical 'observations.' A habit I really, really need to get back into.

 

[Redball Express]

Not sure. If you saw the injury graphic from the game yesterday, it was pretty much the two broken collar bones prior to this current injury. The rest of his issues are overblown. I don't really think he's at much elevated risk of injury over any other player his age at his position, honestly. I know everybody thinks his spine is made of styrofoam at this point, but that's not really anything I lose sleep over.

What I do wonder, though, is how much the time off is going to affect him. He's missed a lot of game time at this point, his skill players are all used to a different signal caller, it's not going to be the seamless. I also wonder how he reacts to the competition from a younger player for the first time.

My best guess is that he rises to the challenge competition wise, after 2-3 games where he's fairly rusty but still playing well. We're going to need the best Tony Romo can give us for games like the MIN and PIT games coming up. Everything else is a game I think Dak gives us every bit as much of a chance to win as Tony does. If I"m coach, though, I'm tempted to sit him through the PHI game, though, if we win in GB. CLE is a good game to get back up to speed with. Taking a 5-1 team and putting Tony in after the bye against the Eagles and having him struggle for a week would start everybody howling, and maybe rightly so. Getting Tony up to speed v. a weaker opponent and playing to his usual level not long after that and I don't see how anybody seriously complains about the decision.

Ya know..

It's not about how much time he missed this season..

it's also about how much time for last year.

By the time you add it all up its like nearly missing the last 2 seasons.

He only played like 15 plays this preseason.

We would have to be out of touch to think he will be ready to play with that much time off..

The odds are against it.

The team has to be very careful in doing this.

 

[CowboyRoy]

If you'd read the post right after you brought it up, you'd have seen where I said "And, no, I'm not denying that I said that I have very little doubt Tony would have gotten points on that final Giants drive." But, like I say, you don't read the posts you respond to, which is what makes you a net-negative to the board as far as I'm concerned.

As for the Dak/Romo stuff, I'll refer to what I've actually said previously and people can decide for themselves how much I've dissed Dak or how much you're just running around trying to tackle people inappropriately and interrupting the actual discussion.

Here's the post I think you're probably (poorly) referring to, since I was responding to your question in the first place:
"Dak's played beautifully, but Romo's a better QB."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/do-y...ck-with-dak-ended.358512/page-10#post-6871005

Post in thread "Romo wins this game" after Giants week:
"Romo probably does. He's a great QB. But Dak played well today. I got no beef with his performance, and I'm actually relieved to have seen it, because I think we've got our next QB on the roster already."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/romo-wins-this-game.356369/#post-6809745

Here's what I had to say about Tony v. Dak in a bit more detail:
"Dak's got all the potential in the world, and he's on a trajectory to be a great QB in his own right. When Tony comes back after next week, you watch. You're going to hear him say exactly what I'm saying now. There's a lot he can still learn about NFL defenses, and Tony's a great guy to teach him. They're both going to respect each other, both going to be good teammates, and both are going to understand the reality of the situation is that we've got two capable QBs right now for the first time in a long time. The writing is on the wall for Tony, but Dak can afford to be patient, and he can use the time to get better."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/are-...-for-a-mighty-fall.358735/page-2#post-6872989

A recent nod to Dak's improvement re: whether or not I think he'd have won the Giants game playing at the level he's playing at now:
"I totally do. He's gotten much better, for sure."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/dak-is-the-man.358978/page-3#post-6881409

More props for Dak and a hat tip for the QB controversy:
"I get the Dak v. Romo thing with Dak playing so well."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/havi...uge-dez-not-needed.358995/page-3#post-6883699

A summary of my take on the QB situation in a nutshell, from day one:
"At this point, though, I'd prefer to just let it play out and see how much Dak progresses between now and whenever Romo is ready and evaluate the position then."
http://cowboyszone.com/threads/lets-do-this-again-dak.358348/page-2#post-6864723​

There you have it. People can decide for themselves whether your reading abilities are 'just fine' or not. I know what I think, and what I think is why I generally try not to make a habit out of responding to your nonsensical 'observations.' A habit I really, really need to get back into.

Nope, none of those are the quotes. Ironic how you left them all out. Are you still denying you said either quote?

The fact that you cant address the question is telling.

 

[Idgit]

Ya know..

It's not about how much time he missed this season..

it's also about how much time for last year.

By the time you add it all up its like nearly missing he last 2 seasons.

He only played like 15 plays this preseason.

We reply would have to be out of touch to think he will be ready to play with the much time off..

The odds are against it.

The team has to be very careful in doing this.

Really, that's what we need to be worried about. That and the chronic back problem.

He did have most of training camp, and was reportedly looking good during it, but he's had a lot of time off. And he's always kind of been guy who needs a quarter to get in the swing of things. Remember the SF game in 2014 when he had the problem throwing the multiple picks with his back turned to the defense off of play action? He settled down pretty quickly and became the beast that he always is for us, but it did take some time (and in that case, it cost us a game).

I think he comes back and eventually plays great for us, but I don't think it's going to be seamless. And with Dak playing so well, you just know what that's going to do to our fanbase.

 

[Idgit]

Nope, none of those are the quotes. Ironic how you left them all out. Are you still denying you said either quote?

The fact that you cant address the question is telling.

Man. I can't tell if you're being serious here, or not.

 

[Hoov]

Oh, my. I know on the field of CZ you fancy yourself the 'Dak Prescott' to my 'Tony Romo,' Roy, but you're not. You're much more the strange kid who keeps showing up at the park with a tin-foil helmet and shoulder pads you made at home out of empty egg cartons who tackles people at in appropriate times and takes the ball and runs around the field with it shouting for other posters to "go long." We have to catch you and send you home for a few days with a reminder that there are rules in public parks, only to have you back the next week, pretending that nothing happened and that you're actually on one of the teams. But nobody on either of the teams really wants you, even as a mercy-pick. They'd rather have the guy with the drop-foot, or the old guy in the back brace. Don't ever compare myself to you as a poster? Who in the world would every want to compare themselves to you as a poster?

And, no, I'm not denying that I said that I have very little doubt Tony would have gotten points on that final Giants drive. You can pull up the quotes, though, to show me where I insinuated we lost the game because of Dak of all things. We lost that game in part because Dez and Beasely dropped TDs and because Williams wasn't unable to get out of bounds in time. Maybe throw in Sean Lee's dropped INT. Playmakers needed to make plays to support the rookie QB in his first start and--like so often last seasoon--they didn't in week one. Which is what I'm sure I said at the time. But by all means, if I said something different and blamed the loss on Dak somehow, job my selective memory for me.

I don't usually pay attention to these types of arguments between posters, but I had to laugh as I read the first paragraph.

 

[Idgit]

I don't usually pay attention to these types of arguments between posters, but I had to laugh as I read the first paragraph.

I don't blame you. I let myself get sucked into them too often. But the worst of the unfair criticisms are like catnip to me.

 

[Redball Express]

Really, that's what we need to be worried about. That and the chronic back problem.

He did have most of training camp, and was reportedly looking good during it, but he's had a lot of time off. And he's always kind of been guy who needs a quarter to get in the swing of things. Remember the SF game in 2014 when he had the problem throwing the multiple picks with his back turned to the defense off of play action? He settled down pretty quickly and became the beast that he always is for us, but it did take some time (and in that case, it cost us a game).

I think he comes back and eventually plays great for us, but I don't think it's going to be seamless. And with Dak playing so well, you just know what that's going to do to our fanbase.

Yes..

and even in Romo's best form..

he starts slow in the beginning of games and has to furiously throw to get back in games.

He places a lot more pressure on the defense with that style of play.

Contrast DAK..

other than the 9ers where we went down 14..

we are controlling the ball and sitting on 4th qt. leads.

Do we want to go back to Romo to have to scramble in the 4th qts?

Not I said the pig.

 

[John813]

Would be nice if debates can not turn into The Ranch, where shots are taken at posters, and instead remain somewhat intelligent.

Dunno if it's because it's election season, but some on here seem to want to get into frivolous debates and pat their own backs more often than not.

 

[Idgit]

Would be nice if debates can not turn into The Ranch, where shots are taken at posters, and instead remain somewhat intelligent.

Dunno if it's because it's election season, but some on here seem to want to get into frivolous debates and pat their own backs more often than not.

You're right. I shouldn't have let myself get sucked in here. I took the bait when he suggested I dissed Dak, of all players, who I've been very supportive of (for obvious reasons). But nobody likes reading pissing matches between posters. I have to do better, stacking good posts on top of good posts regardless of circumstances. Whether it's in the rant zone, the parking lot, or on the moon.

 

[BHendri5]

Here's my opinion: whatever the decision is we win this situation that we have is a great situation to be in. Dak is here and he will be here when Romo is on the sideline in official coaching status. Whether he be coaching here with us or somewhere else. he has said he wants to be an OC once he retires. Fans are only causing themselves grief agonizing over something they have no control over, it gets on my nerves this topic everywhere I go, and on the radio waves, the TV, the majority of fans only watch games for the big hits, runs, receptions, passes etc etc, they have miss all the little things that causes or are the reason for those big plays to happen. Dak has played great, romo has played great through out his career, he has carried this team for years and now that Garrett has built this team mentally, physically to a team that is or is very close to a championship team, do you think Romo is going to just turn it over to someone else just like that after he has toiled year after year, giving blood , sweat and tears to help this team accomplish the ultimate goal, you people really think Romo will just roll over and not take what looks like a very good opportunity to finally reach the pinnacle, you people are idiots. he is not going out like that and the management will give him every opportunity to play the string out and if he gets hurt again so be it, he will walk away I am sure he will make the right decision just like I am sure the management will make the right decision about this situation.
People just let it go, let it be and accept what decision is made back your team.

 

[CowboyChris]

Here's my opinion: whatever the decision is we win this situation that we have is a great situation to be in. Dak is here and he will be here when Romo is on the sideline in official coaching status. Whether he be coaching here with us or somewhere else. he has said he wants to be an OC once he retires. Fans are only causing themselves grief agonizing over something they have no control over, it gets on my nerves this topic everywhere I go, and on the radio waves, the TV, the majority of fans only watch games for the big hits, runs, receptions, passes etc etc, they have miss all the little things that causes or are the reason for those big plays to happen. Dak has played great, romo has played great through out his career, he has carried this team for years and now that Garrett has built this team mentally, physically to a team that is or is very close to a championship team, do you think Romo is going to just turn it over to someone else just like that after he has toiled year after year, giving blood , sweat and tears to help this team accomplish the ultimate goal, you people really think Romo will just roll over and not take what looks like a very good opportunity to finally reach the pinnacle, you people are idiots. he is not going out like that and the management will give him every opportunity to play the string out and if he gets hurt again so be it, he will walk away I am sure he will make the right decision just like I am sure the management will make the right decision about this situation.
People just let it go, let it be and accept what decision is made back your team.

So first you tell us how Romo wants to be OC someday, then you tell us how we are idiots to think he won't let anyone QB this team. Newsflash Romo isnt going to dictate whether he plays or Dak plays....remember the Seattle game when he wanted to go back in the next series?? he was told to stay on the bench.