Where did all the Flacco is better than Romo people go?

[THUMPER]

I'm just curious is why I ask. Last week all the Romo haters said Flacco was the better QB. Today I can't seem to find them. Anyone have an idea where they went?

I wondered about that too. Flacco benefited from playing for a team with a dominant defense and a solid running game. He wasn't ever asked to do much and he didn't. His stats for the playoffs show how much of a rookie he really is. He's got talent but he also has a long ways to go.

Oh and as for winning playoff games... Joe Flacco has yet to win a single game on his own. The RAVENS won 2 playoff games, not Joe Flacco. His performance in all 3 playoff games was pretty poor.

Flacco better than Romo? What a joke! :bang2: :bang2: :bang2:

 

[Ultra Warrior]

When you give Flacco the Trent Dilfer role, he's able to manage the game. When you give him the Tony Romo role, he can't WIN for your team. This is the difference between the 2. There's more pressure placed on Romo to WIN games than what's placed on Flacco. Soon as that pressure is placed on Flacco, he becomes the Rookie you expect.

 

[RoadRunner]

Yes he has. He's also had WAY more great games than poor ones. Just to clarify...

None of those "great games" was ever a playoff game.

Pretty sure Romo has one more year to prove he isn't a choker before Jerry begins looking for a new QB.

 

[RoadRunner]

Who cares where they went. They didn't belong on this, or any other cowboy web site, to begin with if that was what they actually thought.

Like it or not, Flacco has done nothing but ride a defense to the playoffs. And its been said 1000 times, but Dilfer and Brad Johnson did the same. Would anybody take them over Romo?

That's right, Mr. Elitist here is the authority on who is or is not allowed to be a Cowboys fan.

We are all supposed to lie to oursleves rather than state the reality of the situation if it makes a Cowboys player rank lower than a guy who has already accomplished more in his rookie season than Romo has in his career.

Oh, but Romo has prettier stats! Who cares... Winning is all that matters, and right now Flacco > Romo. It does not make me less of a Cowboys fan for calling it the way it is.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

What were the people who said that supposed to do exactly? Log on after the game and say, "Man, Flacco looked bad today playing in the AFC Championship game against a team that made Romo and countless other QB's look like total crap! I sure am eating Crow right now and you people who told me otherwise are SOOOO vindicated right now!"

Since Romo was absoultely punked against Pittsburgh and didn't even make the post-season, they would still have the same arguing points as before.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

This whole thing was funny, at first, but I agree it's gotten out of hand. Almost as annoying, and pathetic, as people who try and put all losses on one player and label them a choker, or whatever, as if football all the sudden becomes a single player game and not a team game.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

That's right, Mr. Elitist here is the authority on who is or is not allowed to be a Cowboys fan.

We are all supposed to lie to oursleves rather than state the reality of the situation if it makes a Cowboys player rank lower than a guy who has already accomplished more in his rookie season than Romo has in his career.

Oh, but Romo has prettier stats! Who cares... Winning is all that matters, and right now Flacco > Romo. It does not make me less of a Cowboys fan for calling it the way it is.

LOL. No, it sure doesn't, but I do like how you conviently left out that Dilfer or Johnson are better than Romo despite the fact that they, you know, accomplished more in their careers than Romo has as well.

Calling the reality like it is or selectively picking things to fit your opinion?