How worried are you about Romo's back?

[ThoughtExperiment]

Oh hell... here, I'll prove you wrong.

Romo started 10 games in 2006, went 6-4. Were 3-3 before he ever took an NFL snap.

In 2008, he missed three games, and we went 1-2.

In 2010, he missed the final 10 games, and we went 5-5.

In 2013, he missed one game, and we went 0-1.

So since he took an NFL snap, the Cowboys are 6-8 without Romo. With him, we're 64-48, or 16 games over .500. Without him we haven't managed .500 ball, and with him, we're well over .500.

That should pretty much end this line of discussion, but I'm betting it won't.

 

[peplaw06]

I'm betting it won't either....

But here's another thing.

In 2010, the 6th game he started, he broke his collar bone in the 2nd quarter. We were up 10-7, and the drive started on the Giants 43. On the play he was knocked out, he completed a pass to Austin for 14 yards. Kitna came in and went 1-2 for 5 yards and Felix Jones had one carry for one yard, and Buehler kicked a FG... Romo got us into FG position on that drive, and Kitna didn't get a first down. For all intents and purposes, when he left the game we were up 13-7.

The QB records attribute that as a loss to Romo and not to Kitna, since Romo started. I really wouldn't attribute that loss to Romo, so one less loss on his record makes us 17 games over .500 with him, and 6-9 without him.

 

[Rynie]

Remember how bad Kitna was in that game against Jax? I actually left that game at halftime. It was turrible.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Yeah.

Long story why, but the other day I was watching parts of that 2008 game when we beat the Bucs 13-9, one of the three games we managed to win that year with Romo out. You almost forget how unspeakably horrible Brad Johnson was. Just absolutely awful.

And like Pep said, IIRC we came out on fire in that Giants game at home. Think we started fast on offense and Newman intercepted that pass and returned it deep in Giants territory. Then Romo goes out and we get outscored about 30-3 and look like we can't beat a HS team.

But any old scrub could win as much as he does...

 

[Doomsday]

And you're wrong. We're 16 games over .500 with him.

Are you serious? You're not blaming Romo for being 8-8, 8-8 and 8-7 the last three years? Then why are you bringing it up as if it's a knock against him?

I'm saying you're blaming him for the team having been .500 since 1997. Considering you brought up the .500 record since 1997 saying we're .500 without him. It's bullshit. Our record since 1997 includes 112 games started by him in which he has been 64-48. 16 games over .500. Simple math will tell you that in games he hasn't started since 1997, the team is 16 games under .500. And he didn't start a game until the middle of 2006. You're bringing up a stat that has 10 years worth of games where he didn't play, and where the team was 16 games under .500, and saying we would be .500 without him. It's patently false.

I'm merely pointing out you aren't above flat out lying in your campaign to tear Romo down.

Care to prove that?

Oh hell... here, I'll prove you wrong.

Romo started 10 games in 2006, went 6-4. Were 3-3 before he ever took an NFL snap.

In 2008, he missed three games, and we went 1-2.

In 2010, he missed the final 10 games, and we went 5-5.

In 2013, he missed one game, and we went 0-1.

So since he took an NFL snap, the Cowboys are 6-8 without Romo. With him, we're 64-48, or 16 games over .500. Without him we haven't managed .500 ball, and with him, we're well over .500.

If you want to continue with the lame argument that since 1997 we are .500, then that would presumably include the 16 games over .500 that we have been when he's actually played. So he's taken a team that's 16 games under .500 and brought them back to even by being 16 games over .500.

You're still assuming I am attacking the Boy Blunder. When I am actually attacking the clown in charge, Jerry, and his assortment of yes men.

For the folks who like to claim "without Romo we would be 1-15" and such, it's simply never happened. Somehow we manage to stay, 8-8.

Without Romo for a entire season, when we still finish 8-8, they'll be saying "Just imagine if Tony hadn't gone down, we woulda been 13-3!"

No, it's "an". Idiot begins with a vowel. ;l

An but and or will get you pretty far.

 

[CobraKai]

I'm assuming undiagnosed autism must be hell.

 

[Rock Slamdance]

I'm not sure doomsday even read what Pep and TE said.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

C-lab id be curious why you were watching 2008 brad Johnson games I don't think his family watched them live

 

[peplaw06]

You're still assuming I am attacking the Boy Blunder. When I am actually attacking the clown in charge, Jerry, and his assortment of yes men.

For the folks who like to claim "without Romo we would be 1-15" and such, it's simply never happened. Somehow we manage to stay, 8-8.

Without Romo for a entire season, when we still finish 8-8, they'll be saying "Just imagine if Tony hadn't gone down, we woulda been 13-3!"

I don't really care who you're attacking.... it doesn't matter.

What matters is you said this team is .500 with Romo and .500 without Romo. And that's completely false.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

"Boy blunder" is kinda good is that skip baylesses?:\

 

[Midswat]

I'm not sure doomsday even read what Pep and TE said.

Had same thought.

 

[2233boys]

That's "A" idiot. Not "an." Irony alert!

Yep idiot.

 

[Doomsday]

No, it's "an". Idiot begins with a vowel. ;l

An unicorn?

 

[Doomsday]

"Boy blunder" is kinda good is that skip baylesses?:\

Frank Gorshin.

 

[Doomsday]

In 2010, he missed the final 10 games, and we went 5-5.

1-5 before that.... Then somehow managed .500 ball the rest of the way to finish 6-10 that season.

See? How could we possibly be 1-5 with Romo playing, then somehow do better without him?

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

1-4 romo and wade Phillips starting
0-2 Kitna and wade Phillips
5-3 kitna and Jason Garrett

:roythehammer

 

[ZeroClub]

I lack confidence in Romo's back - so much so that I'd rather have Andy Dalton as the Cowboys' starting QB this year. I don't like Dalton.

 

[peplaw06]

1-5 before that.... Then somehow managed .500 ball the rest of the way to finish 6-10 that season.

See? How could we possibly be 1-5 with Romo playing, then somehow do better without him?

So your entire argument is based on 2010? Just gonna ignore the other games he's missed and the Giants game where he got knocked out when we had the lead?

Do you actually think about things before you post shit on Romo?

 

[Rynie]

I'm on the fence with Romo, but at the same time I'm kind of ready to move on. It'd be awesome if we somehow fucked around and made it to the NFCCG, but then Garrett would definitely get an extension so I don't know. I'm so confused. Lol

 

[Doomsday]

Do you actually think about things before you post shit on Romo?

I wasn't posting shit on Romo. I was saying no matter what we do or who is under center we still seem to be 8-8.

I'm on the fence with Romo, but at the same time I'm kind of ready to move on. It'd be awesome if we somehow fucked around and made it to the NFCCG, but then Garrett would definitely get an extension so I don't know. I'm so confused. Lol

I still root for Tony and want him to win. He IS a good quarterback for the system he is in and for the era he is playing in, where there's really no defense allowed. But really I have Romo fatigue. He is the face of the franchise and therefore the face of failure, of mediocrity, of 8-8 and of the fumbled snap in Seattle among many other game ending gaffes..

It just is what it is.