Tony Romo

[Doomsday]

Parcells was kissing dudes all over the sidelines.

But.... It only took one fumble of a field goal snap in Seattle to make him hang it all up?

 

[Midswat]

Also, Jerry's reasoning for sticking with Bledsoe was that it was "too early to give up on the season" essentially. Fuck Jerry.

Those next few weeks were some of the best times I've ever had as a Cowboys fan. It was so fun to watch Romo emerge and spark the team. I remember that some fan hung his name up in the ROH at one point. People were pumped and we started winning. Romo did some of his Houdini stuff. Parcells was kissing dudes all over the sidelines. It was a great emergence after watching all those shitty years from 1996 to that point.

Yeah Romos first start at Carolina was a blast to watch.

 

[Dodger12]

I believe it was pressure from Jerruh and the fans coupled with continued failure to learn from mistakes on Bledsoe's part, which got Romo into that Giants game

Jerry was a Drew Henson guy. I don't think I've read or heard anywhere that Jerry pressured BP to play Romo. I do think BP played Henson in the 2004 Thanksgiving Day game to prove something to Jerry that Henson wasn't the guy.

I was a huge Henson homer from his days at Michigan and was thrilled when we took a flyer on him for a 3rd round pick. I thought he'd light up NFL Europe but unfortunately he did nothing to help his cause. Had he picked football instead of baseball, he most probably would have been the #1 pick and his career may well have been different.

 

[Dodger12]

Actually Romo was all Parcells. Jerry was on the radio that week supporting Bledsoe and and sounding like he was against Romo playing... Of course Jerry was probably still butthurt over his boy Henson washing out. (The guy Jim Garrett claimed would be as good or better than Aikman, BTW.)

Parcells has some good stuff on the change in that recent Quincy-Romo vid. He said at some point, vet QBs get to where they can't be coached anymore -- they think they've seen enough that they know it all. On that horrible pick Bledsoe threw to get him benched, the play design was to the complete opposite side of the field, and on the replay you can see the TE (I think Fasano?) open in the endzone. Who knows why Bledsoe went to the other side of the field, but Parcells himself said that was the final straw.

Great post TE and I enjoyed Parcells' interviews on that video. I have to admit though, I don't recall the pre-season game where Romo played the whole game (against Seattle) and was basically auditioning for the QB job. Romo said he went something like 18 of 22. Must have missed that one because Romo was completely under my radar back then.

 

[Dodger12]

Those next few weeks were some of the best times I've ever had as a Cowboys fan. It was so fun to watch Romo emerge and spark the team. I remember that some fan hung his name up in the ROH at one point. People were pumped and we started winning. Romo did some of his Houdini stuff. Parcells was kissing dudes all over the sidelines. It was a great emergence after watching all those shitty years from 1996 to that point.

Good times and I was thrilled that we found our QB. I thought we had our Kurt Warner and that team after Parcells left were considered SB favorites.

 

[peplaw06]

Negative and reality in my context was do you like the DC or not? Do you bitch or be negative to stir pots. A person is then objective to meet their own needs.
Parcells has said he knew Romo could be good. Could he get to Romo to teach what he could? It certainly helps that the dumbass QB at the time got himself cut due to personal habits so the DC had a reason to keep Romo.

This post exemplifies the delusion it takes to be a "positive" fan (read: "homer").

It all boils down to do you like the Cowboys or not... if you like them, you have to be positive, everything/everyone on the team is great. If you're negative or bitch about anything, you're just trying to stir the pot.

Then you see the comments on Carter. Before he got cut, gotta be positive about him... he's gotten us to the playoffs! Than after he gets cut, he's a dumbass.

Personally, I can't stand it when a fan's opinion of a player is determined by what shirt he's wearing.

 

[Bluenoser]

The reason people think posters are negative is because reading the posts on here you would think the team would go 3-13, but for the most part everyone had us at 10+ wins. You guys seem to shit on the team in the majority of your posts.

 

[cmd34]

See, I don't think so. Sheik and I are two of the biggest Romo fans I know. Everyone here loves the O Line. Most like Linehan and Marinelli. Mostly, people are excited about the improved pass rush.

The concerns here are RB, secondary, and a general distrust of Garrett. Most here hate Jerry but would agree that he has been somewhat neutered.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

I think you're just too sensitive. You admit yourself most of us think the team will win 10+ this year. Guess this place does seem negative compared to Blogging the Boys or the Own, though.

Hey guys, instead of discussing our RB situation, let's have more "WHat's on the menu today gais!!" and "What jersey are you wearing tomorrow night?!?" posts.

And how about a few "Can Escobar become the next Gronk?" threads, too.

 

[SixisBetter]

Hey guys, instead of discussing our RB situation, let's have more "WHat's on the menu today gais!!" and "What jersey are you wearing tomorrow night?!?" posts.

And how about a few "Can Escobar become the next Gronk?" threads, too.

Yes and everyone should have #CowboysNation in their signature.
Maybe we could get Spags to write a guest piece here from time to time.
I love the Cowboys and have for a long time.
That doesn't mean I think everything they do is the best thing ever.

 

[Doomsday]

Post numbers 26, 28, 29 and 30 make me proud to be a Universor.

To those posts I will only add - the Homers think anyone saying anything "negative" is a "bad fan" and they think they are better fans. They have this rather haughty, superiorness attitude about it. Imperious.

Some of us want a better TEAM, not "better fans."

You fucks. Idiots.

 

[dbair1967]

You fucks. Idiots.

Don't be so hard on yourself Dooms

 

[Bluenoser]

I think you're just too sensitive. You admit yourself most of us think the team will win 10+ this year. Guess this place does seem negative compared to Blogging the Boys or the Own, though.

Hey guys, instead of discussing our RB situation, let's have more "WHat's on the menu today gais!!" and "What jersey are you wearing tomorrow night?!?" posts.

And how about a few "Can Escobar become the next Gronk?" threads, too.

I'm not sensitive. I don't care either way, just giving you my opinion.

 

[Cdgreer]

The reason people think posters are negative is because reading the posts on here you would think the team would go 3-13, but for the most part everyone had us at 10+ wins. You guys seem to shit on the team in the majority of your posts.

Exactly! It's ok to be negative but to be negative just to do it is quite stupid.

 

[Doomsday]

Exactly! It's ok to be negative but to be negative just to do it is quite stupid.

But, you should read around here and you'll find out the post you quoted just isn't so. We have a prediction thread here of how we think the Boys will do this year, and there's only a couple of people who believe they'll finish with less than 10 wins.

I haven't seen anyone here who fits your meter of being "negative" just to be so. Because there's not any.

The PROBLEM is the definition of "negative" and so far, it looks like that definition is anything at all critical, objective and not just mindless pom-pom waving and cheerleading like Cleveland Browns fans do.

 

[peplaw06]

See, I don't think so. Sheik and I are two of the biggest Romo fans I know. Everyone here loves the O Line. Most like Linehan and Marinelli. Mostly, people are excited about the improved pass rush.

The concerns here are RB, secondary, and a general distrust of Garrett. Most here hate Jerry but would agree that he has been somewhat neutered.

I think you're just too sensitive. You admit yourself most of us think the team will win 10+ this year. Guess this place does seem negative compared to Blogging the Boys or the Own, though.

Hey guys, instead of discussing our RB situation, let's have more "WHat's on the menu today gais!!" and "What jersey are you wearing tomorrow night?!?" posts.

And how about a few "Can Escobar become the next Gronk?" threads, too.

These posts are spot on.

That's the nature of a message forum. Discussion is pushed by disagreement. How many threads can you get with post after post of how great Romo is? It's a decided argument.

The things that aren't decided, and that will drive debate, are the things that aren't certain. When you have uncertainty, then you have differing opinions.

Anyone who finds echo chamber threads interesting, or indicative of some level of fandom, is going to be challenged here.

 

[peplaw06]

Exactly! It's ok to be negative but to be negative just to do it is quite stupid.

What does this even mean? Do you think there aren't legit reasons for being unconvinced that the team will go 16-0?

 

[Cdgreer]

It is what it reads. To throw negativity out there to stir pots or with a personal agenda is foolish......case in point.....does anyone listen to Skip Bayless? He's a blowhard.

 

[Dodger12]

To throw negativity out there to stir pots or with a personal agenda is foolish

What does this even mean? What personal agenda do folks have?

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Do you know someone named ccboy?