Chipotlemonger said:
If Romo comes in for an injured Dak and leads the Cowboys to a huge comeback victory, could the sports world handle it?
Forget the sports world. I learned earlier this thread won't even handle it.
*** COWBOYS 2016 Season ***
296,031 Views |
3441 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by Ag Natural
Forget the sports world. I learned earlier this thread won't even handle it.
I hope so, because the alternative is putting in Buttfumble, and I'm certain he'd give up that 28 point lead.
mts6175 said:
Watching the National Championship tonight made me think of this, the Cowboys need to go after OJ Howard in the draft this year as Witten's replacement. Dude is a beast.
Howard would be a late 1st rounder most likely, take him then the Auburn DE in the 2nd
Until Witten is a liability on offense, hell no to wasting a first round pick on a TE. This team needs to focus on adding talent to the defense.
Would be a huge mistake to start Romo. Not even worth consideration. Your team is the #1 seed, tied for the best record in franchise history, and Dak is an MVP candidate. How can you consider starting Romo? I don't care if Romo is the better passer. He's also more prone to turn overs. He's also not the guy that has been the leader for the football team this entire season. You don't mess with a teams leadership and chemistry when it is working.
Also, the idea of playing Romo and if he gets hurt then just go to Dak doesn't work in reality. This isn't baseball where the backup can just come in and pick up where the starter left. A teams rhythm is developed from the starting QB. Having a fragile QB means likely having to switch QB's after a big hit, thus causing any offensive rhythm to stop. A few drives to gain some rhythm back is all it takes to lose a game. Also, did I mention Dak led this team to a 13-3 record? Want to know when Romo has ever succeeded in that? 0 (my mistake, he has 1 season). It's laughable to think Dak shouldn't be the starter in this game. Or to think he has a short leash. Rant over.
Also, the idea of playing Romo and if he gets hurt then just go to Dak doesn't work in reality. This isn't baseball where the backup can just come in and pick up where the starter left. A teams rhythm is developed from the starting QB. Having a fragile QB means likely having to switch QB's after a big hit, thus causing any offensive rhythm to stop. A few drives to gain some rhythm back is all it takes to lose a game. Also, did I mention Dak led this team to a 13-3 record? Want to know when Romo has ever succeeded in that? 0 (my mistake, he has 1 season). It's laughable to think Dak shouldn't be the starter in this game. Or to think he has a short leash. Rant over.
CSWendt said:
Would be a huge mistake to start Romo. Not even worth consideration. Your team is the #1 seed, tied for the best record in franchise history, and Dak is an MVP candidate. How can you consider starting Romo? I don't care if Romo is the better passer. He's also more prone to turn overs. He's also not the guy that has been the leader for the football team this entire season. You don't mess with a teams leadership and chemistry when it is working.
Also, the idea of playing Romo and if he gets hurt then just go to Dak doesn't work in reality. This isn't baseball where the backup can just come in and pick up where the starter left. A teams rhythm is developed from the starting QB. Having a fragile QB means likely having to switch QB's after a big hit, thus causing any offensive rhythm to stop. A few drives to gain some rhythm back is all it takes to lose a game. Also, did I mention Dak led this team to a 13-3 record? Want to know when Romo has ever succeeded in that? 0. It's laughable to think Dak shouldn't be the starter in this game. Or to think he has a short leash. Rant over.
If you're gonna argue so matter of factly - don't be completely ignorant of the subject. Any real Cowboys fan knows Romo has a 13-3 and a 12-4 season under his belt. So that makes 1, not 0 wise guy.
As for the rest of it. Read the whole thread. I said Daks leash shouldn't be very long. Didn't say you outright must start Romo. Voiced I'd be more comfortable that way and that's my opinion. Also, most pros will tell you chemistry isn't what it's made out to be if there's no cancer. Romo has had chemistry a plenty with this team.
CSWendt said:
Also, did I mention Dak led this team to a 13-3 record? Want to know when Romo has ever succeeded in that? 0.
Actually in 2007. But keep with your narrative.
You are correct, Romo did have a 13-3 record one season. I was thinking he went 12-4. You want to know what Romo did with a 13-3 record in his playoff start? He lost. Not a Romo hater by any stretch, I just think it's an awful idea to pull the hot guy for the injury prone player who hasn't played a meaningful play in 2 years.
CSWendt said:
You are correct, Romo did have a 13-3 record one season. I was thinking he went 12-4. You want to know what Romo did with a 13-3 record in his playoff start? He lost. Not a Romo hater by any stretch, I just think it's an awful idea to pull the hot guy for the injury prone player who hasn't played a meaningful play in 2 years.
Once again. Read the thread. Didn't say pull the hot guy. So what if Dak loses after his 13-3?
Also he lost by being in a spot he never should have been. Holding.
Read my post. I said it is laughable to even think of Dak having a short leash. Has any team in history had their 13-3 QB for no reason related to his level of play?
CSWendt said:
Read my post. I said it is laughable to even think of Dak having a short leash. Has any team in history had their 13-3 QB for no reason related to his level of play?
You're right. If we go down by 14 to Seattle, Atlanta, Green Bay or New England late, yeah I trust Dak more. He's clearly superior in the hurry up and mid to deep ball game. /eyeroll
You're assuming Dak will automatically get down by 14 so why even start him? One of the best things about this Cowboys teams is they have rarely trailed this season. Yet, several times Dak showed the ability to stay calm and lead a comeback. Sure, if you want to play the hypothetical game of IF's then go ahead, I'll let you carry on your hypothetical scenarios.
CSWendt said:
You're assuming Dak will automatically get down by 14 so why even start him? One of the best things about this Cowboys teams is they have rarely trailed this season. Yet, several times Dak showed the ability to stay calm and lead a comeback. Sure, if you want to play the hypothetical game of IF's then go ahead, I'll let you carry on your hypothetical scenarios.
Not assuming. I said if. And I thank you for allowing me to continue.
CSWendt said:
You are correct, Romo did have a 13-3 record one season. I was thinking he went 12-4. You want to know what Romo did with a 13-3 record in his playoff start? He lost. Not a Romo hater by any stretch, I just think it's an awful idea to pull the hot guy for the injury prone player who hasn't played a meaningful play in 2 years.
He lost. Not the Cowboys. Romo lost.
Reggie. Relax.
bonfarr said:mts6175 said:
Watching the National Championship tonight made me think of this, the Cowboys need to go after OJ Howard in the draft this year as Witten's replacement. Dude is a beast.
Howard would be a late 1st rounder most likely, take him then the Auburn DE in the 2nd
Stock is climbing by the minute on Howard. Do want. Probably won't be there.
Can we all just agree that College football is too long? It's been 3 hours and the 3rd quarter isn't even over yet
Unthought Known said:CSWendt said:
You are correct, Romo did have a 13-3 record one season. I was thinking he went 12-4. You want to know what Romo did with a 13-3 record in his playoff start? He lost. Not a Romo hater by any stretch, I just think it's an awful idea to pull the hot guy for the injury prone player who hasn't played a meaningful play in 2 years.
He lost. Not the Cowboys. Romo lost.
Romo lost every game on his own. In a vacuum. Like the 52-48 Denver game that he ended with a pick. All his fault. Um. What? He scored 48 and lost.
Most people forget that those 8-8 type seasons would have been 4 or less wins with 90% of other quarterbacks in the league. We stunk for a while.
CSWendt said:
Can we all just agree that College football is too long? It's been 3 hours and the 3rd quarter isn't even over yet
Another reason why I like the NFL more than college. Games don't take 4+ hours.
CSWendt said:
Can we all just agree that College football is too long? It's been 3 hours and the 3rd quarter isn't even over yet
As much as I love college football, the length of games is a major issue.
The games really are too long. It's 11:30 in South Carolina. You might be up watching your favorite team until 1am.
I drove bus said:CSWendt said:
Can we all just agree that College football is too long? It's been 3 hours and the 3rd quarter isn't even over yet
As much as I love college football, the length of games is a major issue.
If they aren't going to fix it at least change the time slots. Every. Single. Game. Runs. Long.
The games are stupidly long. I don't hold much hope of them reducing commercials. But as far as in game changes go, there is no reason to stop the clock for a 1st down except late in each half. Halftime needs a trim too.
I think the point we are making is this. We have 2 players on the roster that can carry the offense on their back. One is Elliott and the other isn't Dak.
No offense to Dak. He's still learning and hopefully not close to reaching his potential.
No offense to Dak. He's still learning and hopefully not close to reaching his potential.
RossK10 said:
I love Romo, but this is the worst case of backup glorification I've ever seen. Someone even said its "easy to see" Zeke getting an extra 0.5 YPC with Romo.
100% what I'm thinking reading the past 100 posts, and even lol'd at the same .5 ypc comment.
Game was too long. But glad I stayed up to watch the finish.
Anyone who thinks a prolific passer doesn't open the run game up and improve it is a football fool.
I don't get how professional games are about 3 to 3.5 hours long and amateur (college) games are 4 to 4.5 hours long. Makes no sense to me. College basketball games are quite a bit shorter in length than professional basketball games, no?
They stop the clock after every first down to reset the chains. That plus what seems like more commercial breaks adds up
Reginald Cousins said:
Anyone who thinks a prolific passer doesn't open the run game up and improve it is a football fool.
The same guys that think Bob Sturm is a football genius.
Wait, this idiot thinks Dak is gonna be on a short leash?
He would have to throw 3 AWFUL picks and look lost to get pulled.
He would have to throw 3 AWFUL picks and look lost to get pulled.
Romo isn't playing unless we're down 30 and dak has thrown two pick sixes and is maybe also injured. Making the move at this point in the season makes virtually no sense at all
Keep banging that drum, Reg.Reginald Cousins said:
Anyone who thinks a prolific passer doesn't open the run game up and improve it is a football fool.
I wish I could remember, or had time to dig through the stats, but the Cowboys and Dak had a not-very-good game, then turned around the next week and "recovered" by having one of the best games of the season. I think Dak will be just fine carrying the offense on his back.PooDoo said:
I think the point we are making is this. We have 2 players on the roster that can carry the offense on their back. One is Elliott and the other isn't Dak.
No offense to Dak. He's still learning and hopefully not close to reaching his potential.
Reginald Cousins said:
Anyone who thinks a prolific passer doesn't open the run game up and improve it is a football fool.
Anyone who thinks a solid passer who can run and threatens with the bootleg....... Is a football fool.
Featured Stories
See All
66:03
11h ago
6.2k
Players to Watch: No. 15 Texas A&M at Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
54:59
13h ago
1.1k
37:53
10h ago
826
Reed Report: Chatting with D-Kirk, recapping A&M's 4-0 home stand
by Luke Evangelist
10:56
17h ago
3.0k