Indeed, smarter than Bob,
I'm more than certain Bob would run circles around you. I've had plenty of discussions with Bob, and I've seen enough of your posts to know that.
and so much so that it has left you dumbfounded and unable to make a cohesive argument.
Don't confuse my lack of response to you as being dumbfounded. It's more comparable to me not responding to CCBoy over at CZ.... I don't see the point. But since you asked for it....
You concluded that Romo was overcompensating for a bad team when this is what he has always done.
In the context of 2010, that's exactly what happened.
He has always tried to make the play and we get burned by it time and again.
Always? Really?
He stopped doing it in 2009
...so not always?
but started right back last year.
So you're saying he sometimes tries to make the play and we get burned by it? Brilliant!!
I pointed out the Detroit game because he was overcompensating when the game was all but over.
Overcompensating for what? The huge lead we had? He just had to make it a close game huh? How ridiculous.
He forces the play no matter the situation and we lose because of it.
Really? No matter the situation huh? What play did he force against San Francisco? Washington? Let me guess... the plays Romo forces "no matter the situation" are the ones that result in an interception? Real perceptive there... For someone who forces the play no matter the situation, he sure has a good QB rating and winning percentage.
Here's a hint: If you want to have a real debate with me, forget the hyperbole.
Go back to my list of games and you will see Romo doing the exact same thing in each one of those. He does not have a play so he forces one and we end up losing.
Let's see...
Romo has helped us lose plenty of games and he has helped us win a bunch as well.
Well, right away, this is a different comment than your "no matter the situation" bullshit you were spouting in your last brilliant post. Make up your mind.
I notice the first game you chose was one where Romo threw three picks. Shocking. It's also the only game of 2007 that you chose. Then again, we only lost 3 games, so you're gonna have a hard time proving that he forced plays no matter the situation and we ended up losing in 2007. Still you'd think there would be a plethora of games in your list every year, considering this type of thing happens "no matter the situation."
So which of Romo's play(s) directly impacted the outcome, and exactly how were they "forced?"
One game in 2008. And another one where Romo had 3 picks. I'll assume you're going to cite the pass to Witten as the one that was forced and lost us the game. I'm not going to argue that was a mistake. It obviously was. I will say, that the game was tied when that INT happened. So if you take that INT away, the game is still in doubt. But let's say I give you that one. OK, two full seasons of Romo starting down (29 games), and you have one.
NYG, Denver, and Green Bay 2009;
First thing I notice is you already said he "stopped doing it in 2009." Curious as to why you would say that after you cited three games in the season?
Oh well, let's take a look anyway.
NYG - I'll ASSUME you're talking about the first game vs the Giants, since he had 3 picks, and that seems to be a trend here. The first pick, the Giants audibled out of Romo's pre-snap read and he didn't see Roy E's DB drop off underneath Crayton's out route. The second pick bounced off Witten's heel and into the hands of the DB who was 3 steps behind Witten. The third pick Romo clearly didn't see the Safety over the top. It's hard to say any of those were "forced."
DEN - He had one INT... Well at least we know you didn't just do a google search for "Romo 3 INT game." The interception that Bailey got was on a miscommunication between Romo and Austin. Looked like an option route. Austin had inside position on Bailey, if they had been on the same page, it would have been complete, and probably a TD. But I don't see how was it "forced..."
GB - OK, you're going to have to help me out on this one and point out on this game exactly which play Romo forced that lost us the game. This ought to be good.
I'm stuck on one so far. Three seasons down.
Minnesota, Chicago, and Tennessee 2010;
CHI - Uh yeah, help me out again. Which play(s) are you talking about?
TEN - Oh boy, back to a 3 INT game. The first pick was a ball to a wide-open Bennett in the end zone, who let it slip through his hands and popped up to be picked. The second one was to Bennett in the flat, and was tipped at the LOS, letting the DB cut in front of Bennett. And the last pick was when we were down 7 with :40 seconds left in the game. No fumbles. Which play are you referring to?
MIN - 2 INTs, no fumbles. First pick was tipped at the LOS. The second pick was to Witten, and Henderson dropped out of the LOS underneath to pick the pass. I'll give you a forced play on that one.
NYJ, Detroit, and TBD 2011.
The INT to Revis was "forced." The pass to Witten against the Lions, I will give you. The Carpenter INT and the Houston pick on the Robinson slant, I wouldn't call forced.
My count is you've pointed out 4 plays since 2007.
There are others I am sure,
God, I hope so. I mean, "no matter the situation," right? Please tell me you have more than what amounts to one play per season
but those are the significant ones from 2007 and on.
The four significant ones?
There are probably some wins that Romo tried to give away (Carolina 2009?)
Is that a question? You think Romo might have tried to give away the Carolina game? How so?
but the rest of the team wouldn't let him do it.
Brilliant!!
I shouldn't have to spell it out for you,
Yeah, you should. If you're going to make ridiculous comments, and try to defend them, then I want to be clear what you're referring to.
but when I said Romo "directly impacted the outcome" it meant that he directly contributed to the loss.
Like I said, he "directly impacts the outcome" of every game in which he plays.
By "directly contributed to the loss" I mean that if he hadn't thrown that interception that put the opponent in scoring range we would have had a much greater chance of winning.
All four times? Or are you just going to say Romo can't ever throw an interception in a loss? Just wondering if it's that you have a ridiculously high standard, or if you have judged Romo's career on four plays?
If he throws the ball away instead of slinging it off his back foot, slinging it into coverage, or trying to thread a needle to a receiver who isn't going to fight for the ball then we would have had a much greater chance of winning.
OK, the back foot thing is just retarded. You guys are basing that opinion off of one pass. If you want Romo to not throw the ball into coverage, you might as well put Captain Dink and Dunk Dilfer under center. And now it's Romo's fault if he throws the ball to a WR who doesn't fight for the ball?
These standards are just crazy.
You are right that Romo was overcompensating, but you were acting too much like a child to understand that I was telling you it is something he has always done.
Always done huh? When was that again?
You and Bob may resume your pillow fight.
Whatever you call it, you're not man enough to participate.
