You're completely missing the point, and ot comes across as a little dense honestly because the point is pretty obvious.
The point is NOT that Romo is comparable to Brady.
The point IS that to troll through about a dozen or so bad games of a 100 game career in which the rest of his performances range from good stellar is patently retarded and reeks of attempting to cherry pick outliers to fit a false narrative invented to justify deficient football acumen.
If you want to back that be my guest, but don't pretend that there's a quality point to be derived from it, because there isn't.
Again, if you want to say Dak's the hot hand so let's ride it, fine. If you want to say Dak's the future so let's play it out with him, fine. There are quality arguments to be made in Dak's favor. But to pretend that Romo's decade of quality quarterbacking doesn't exist simply to justify your love of dak is quite honestly pathetic. Saying, "hey remember those couple of times Romo didn't perform to his usual high standards?" is frankly pretty ignorant.
It's also pretty ignorant to ignore the fact that, no matter how good Dak becomes (and I think his ceiling is pretty high), he will also have games where you'll pretty much point to him as the main reason we lost. Same as Brady, Manning, Brees et al.
GASP! Did he just compare Dak to Brady, Brees and Manning?
No jackass, I didn't.
And THAT'S the God damn fucking point.