Angrymesscan
DCC 4Life
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 3,796
I think Romo is a better QB than Dak right now, but Dak might be better for this Offense. That's why I would not pull the switch until/if the game gets to big for Dak.
If you really believe that Romo gives you the best shot in the playoffs I think the argument could be made that it's better to continue to sit Romo. If you play him now there are 10 games before the playoffs for him to break a collar bone, back, rib or other bone. You're better off waiting as long as possible to put Romo in.If Dallas gets to the playoffs who do you want to lead the way?
If Dallas gets to the playoffs because Prescott starts the entire season and gets them there while Romo sit on the bench? Prescott. Romo has the experience edge in spades but if Prescott is good enough to get them there through the grind of the regular season then he is good enough to win when he gets there, IMO. And if he gets there and loses, so be it. Either way, in the playoffs I am going with the guy who got me there.If Dallas gets to the playoffs who do you want to lead the way?
I know it's not done, but it would be fun to see Romo come in at the beginning of a quarter and run a series from the no huddle, just to give the defense fits.Would anyone be okay if Romo started with change of pace Dak taking five snaps-per-game?
i have a feeling Jerruh may do this. His Razorback 2.0 formation.
I would absolutely hate it. You do screwy stuff like that when you don't have a good team. You don't do it when you have an elite offense like we have right now. It's like most gimmick stuff, the only reason to do it is because you can't win with the normal stuff. That's not the situation in Dallas.Would anyone be okay if Romo started with change of pace Dak taking five snaps-per-game?
i have a feeling Jerruh may do this. His Razorback 2.0 formation.
Agreed.I would absolutely hate it. You do screwy stuff like that when you don't have a good team. You don't do it when you have an elite offense like we have right now. It's like most gimmick stuff, the only reason to do it is because you can't win with the normal stuff. That's not the situation in Dallas.
That makes about as much sense as LT's backups need playing time theory. Either he's your best chance at winning, or he isn't. And if he is, he needs to be playing. If the team decides Dak is their best chance, he needs to continue playing.If you really believe that Romo gives you the best shot in the playoffs I think the argument could be made that it's better to continue to sit Romo. If you play him now there are 10 games before the playoffs for him to break a collar bone, back, rib or other bone. You're better off waiting as long as possible to put Romo in.
I didn't have a program regarding backups. I had a proposal distinctly for Romo. At least get it right if you want to ridicule it.That makes about as much sense as LT's backups need playing time theory. Either he's your best chance at winning, or he isn't. And if he is, he needs to be playing. If the team decides Dak is their best chance, he needs to continue playing.
~break glass in case of playoffs~
Oooooh. Well, that makes all the difference in the world.I didn't have a program regarding backups. I had a proposal distinctly for Romo. At least get it right if you want to ridicule it.
Well I'm not one of those people who actually believes Romo is our best chance in the playoffs. But Romo is very likely to get hurt if you play him for an extended period of time. Plus it's sort of what the Broncos did last year to win the Superbowl. Except Manning hadn't missed a whole season of football for two years straight like Romo.That makes about as much sense as LT's backups need playing time theory. Either he's your best chance at winning, or he isn't. And if he is, he needs to be playing. If the team decides Dak is their best chance, he needs to continue playing.
~break glass in case of playoffs~
What do definitely likely mean.Well I'm not one of those people who actually believes Romo is our best chance in the playoffs. But Romo is definitely likely to get hurt if you play him for an extended period of time. Plus it's sort of what the Broncos did last year to win the Superbowl. Except Manning hadn't missed a whole season of football for two years straight like Romo.
Sort of like "very likely"What do definitely likely mean.
Just having fun, but I always thought likely was a stand alone word.Sort of like "very likely"
I just find it laughable that anyone could think, including our coaching staff and owner, that the guy who has 2 career playoff wins gives us the best chance to win.Well I'm not one of those people who actually believes Romo is our best chance in the playoffs. But Romo is very likely to get hurt if you play him for an extended period of time. Plus it's sort of what the Broncos did last year to win the Superbowl. Except Manning hadn't missed a whole season of football for two years straight like Romo.
Apparently according to some you simply need to have experience to be good in the playoffs.I just find it laughable that anyone could think, including our coaching staff and owner, that the guy who has 2 career playoff wins gives us the best chance to win.
Based on what? His outstanding 2-4 playoff record?
In Romo's defense, he's thrown 8 TD and 2 interceptions in the postseason. If he hadn't gone to the playoffs in 09 without an oline or 14 without a d line, he'd probably be closer to 4-4.I just find it laughable that anyone could think, including our coaching staff and owner, that the guy who has 2 career playoff wins gives us the best chance to win.
Based on what? His outstanding 2-4 playoff record?
Place that along side a rookie with 5 wins in his entire career.I just find it laughable that anyone could think, including our coaching staff and owner, that the guy who has 2 career playoff wins gives us the best chance to win.
Based on what? His outstanding 2-4 playoff record?
It helps.Apparently according to some you simply need to have experience to be good in the playoffs.