QB Controversy Thread...

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Okay whatcha got? What is the salient criticism of Dak that remains true week in and week out?
What do YOU have? because I have a decade of top notch QB play.

It's pretty ridiculous and pathetic that some of you get so offended that someone might have the audacity to suggest that a multiple pro bowl performer should play ahead of a rookie, as if someone was suggesting Brandon Weeden should be playing.

My point has always been and remains that defenses can confuse Dak, a rookie, in ways that they can't do to Romo simply by virtue of the disparity in experience. Maybe Dak can overcome that obstacle. But to pretend it's not at all an obstacle is akin to sticking your head in the sand.

I actually think, and I've said this before, that I get why someone would want to stick with dak. Personally, I'd rather roll the dice with the experience, but I get staying with what's been working.

My main question is, is what's been working repeatable against playoff defenses that can confuse and stifle a rookie? I have my doubts but we'll see, because as I've been saying for weeks, it's too late to turn back now.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
What do YOU have? because I have a decade of top notch QB play.

It's pretty ridiculous and pathetic that some of you get so offended that someone might have the audacity to suggest that a multiple pro bowl performer should play ahead of a rookie, as if someone was suggesting Brandon Weeden should be playing.

My point has always been and remains that defenses can confuse Dak, a rookie, in ways that they can't do to Romo simply by virtue of the disparity in experience. Maybe Dak can overcome that obstacle. But to pretend it's not at all an obstacle is akin to sticking your head in the sand.

I actually think, and I've said this before, that I get why someone would want to stick with dak. Personally, I'd rather roll the dice with the experience, but I get staying with what's been working.

My main question is, is what's been working repeatable against playoff defenses that can confuse and stifle a rookie? I have my doubts but we'll see, because as I've been saying for weeks, it's too late to turn back now.
Very spot on and I think all but the most Romo-scarred or full-on homer-modes agree with you.

I'm in this with Dak till the end, but at some point this coaching staff is going to have to determine if a Championship shot is worth saving when Dak is stifled.

Maybe they know something about Romo we don't. Maybe they've seen so much rust they feel safer with Dak. Maybe, but I doubt it. I think they were gutless not to try Romo when he was first ready.

Now it's going to be hard for him to play himself to full speed.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
What do YOU have? because I have a decade of top notch QB play.
12-2 as a starter. 20 pass TDs, 7 rushing TDs, only 4 INTs, most importantly zero broken bones. I have a lack of delusion that a gimpy 36 year old who's been battling injuries since the Gulf Oil Spill can spotaneously be better than a guy who's been playing at an ELITE level. Especially when we dropped 3 games in 2014 specifically because of his shot back.

It's pretty ridiculous and pathetic that some of you get so offended that someone might have the audacity to suggest that a multiple pro bowl performer should play ahead of a rookie, as if someone was suggesting Brandon Weeden should be playing.
Because there's an inherent failure to recongize that this rookie is playing at a Pro Bowl level. It's not an insult to Troy Aikman or Roger Staubach that I think Dak should play in front of them either. They were amazing, but now they're old fucking men who don't have the physical skills or endurance to play football anymore. After Romo's broken bones twice in the last two hits he's taken, it's not an insult to his legacy to assume he can't hang with a rookie who's playing better football than most veterans in the league.

My point has always been and remains that defenses can confuse Dak, a rookie, in ways that they can't do to Romo simply by virtue of the disparity in experience. Maybe Dak can overcome that obstacle. But to pretend it's not at all an obstacle is akin to sticking your head in the sand.
I acknowledge it's an obstacle. But it's not one that's shown up in Dak's passer rating, interception numbers, win-loss ratio etc. Romo's obstacle, his broken fucking body, is a much more difficult hurdle to overcome, and unlike Dak's, only gets worse as he plays.

Every team, other than the Giants, who had the weather as a defensive MVP, has not managed to capitalize on Dak's inexperience. Even though the Ravens, Vikings, and Bucs all had top notch defenses. Sometimes I'm fucking dumbfounded by how little credit going 12-2 gets you, when a past his expiration date QB is riding the bench.

I actually think, and I've said this before, that I get why someone would want to stick with dak. Personally, I'd rather roll the dice with the experience, but I get staying with what's been working.

My main question is, is what's been working repeatable against playoff defenses that can confuse and stifle a rookie? I have my doubts but we'll see, because as I've been saying for weeks, it's too late to turn back now.
We've been playing playoff caliber teams. Most of them playing for their playoff spot. Is it repeatable against the Redskins? I think so, since we fucking repeated it. Lions, Ravens, Packers, Redskins, Bucs, Steelers, we won games against playoff worthy teams, repeatedly.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,753
Jerry Jones admits he 'intentionally' stirs up the Cowboys QB controversy

Jerry is a showman first and foremost

by Will Brinson

 @WillBrinson

10h ago • 1 min read

The old adage of "no press is bad press" absolutely applies to the approach Jerry Jones takes when running the Cowboys. The Dallas owner loves attention and makes no bones about his love for attention.


He even admitted as much, in an interview with Jason Gay of the Wall Street Journal, that he intentionally stirs up controversy when it comes to the Cowboys quarterback controversy.

"That's one of the things that makes sports interesting," Jones said. "I do feed that."

Leading up to Sunday, there was a week's worth of fervent debate about whether Dak Prescott or Tony Romo should play for the Cowboys. Dak struggled the previous two weeks, with the Cowboys failing to score many points and losing to the Giants.

With Jerry having already done a quick jig when it comes to the Cowboys situation earlier in the season and then promptly opening the door for a quarterback controversy, everyone in and around the NFL spent the week talking about the Cowboys quarterback situation.

That's not an accident.

"I think there's some of me that wants to [stir things up]," Jones said. "That probably is intentional."

Jones' plan, which also featured him backpedaling on his initial comments, worked out pretty well. The Cowboys looked impressive against Tampa Bay and Prescott, with his back up against the wall a bit when it comes to the depth chart, promptly completed 88.9 percent of his passes.

Any quarterback controversy was promptly snuffed out after Sunday night. Without ever being promoted, Romo was relegated to the second string again.

Probably this time for good. Or at least until Jerry decides to stir things up again.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,726
Man, I really really fucking hate Jerry Jones. Why in the hell would you do something that might cause detriment to your chances of winning? I mean, why even chance it? I know why, but this just furthers the idea that winning isn't the end all for him. He has ulterior motives that at times transcend winning.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
You are hopeless Townsend.

It's funny how you ignore and downplay how bad dak was against Minnesota and much of Philly, and parts of at least San Francisco and Baltimore. It's funny how quick you are to praise Dak for 12-2 but are so flippant about Romo for 15-4.

I'm not going to return fire in kind with specious arguments that ignore or spin half the reality. Because I don't want to be right.

I want a championship. I hope you are right that Dak can overcome or at the very least the team can hide his obstacles.

Oh, and comparing a 36 year old Romo who was 3-1 last year to QBs who are 50 and 74 and haven't played in decades is patently retarded, but go ahead and keep trotting it out there as if you remotely have a point.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Man, I really really fucking hate Jerry Jones. Why in the hell would you do something that might cause detriment to your chances of winning? I mean, why even chance it? I know why, but this just furthers the idea that winning isn't the end all for him. He has ulterior motives that at times transcend winning.
He is covering his own stupidity by pretending to have meant to have sparked controversy all along. Shallow ploy.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Man, I really really fucking hate Jerry Jones. Why in the hell would you do something that might cause detriment to your chances of winning? I mean, why even chance it? I know why, but this just furthers the idea that winning isn't the end all for him. He has ulterior motives that at times transcend winning.
He's a moron. It's like if one of the stooges owned a team.
 

kidd

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
2,377
You are hopeless Townsend.

It's funny how you ignore and downplay how bad dak was against Minnesota and much of Philly, and parts of at least San Francisco and Baltimore. It's funny how quick you are to praise Dak for 12-2 but are so flippant about Romo for 15-4.

I'm not going to return fire in kind with specious arguments that ignore or spin half the reality. Because I don't want to be right.

I want a championship. I hope you are right that Dak can overcome or at the very least the team can hide his obstacles.

Oh, and comparing a 36 year old Romo who was 3-1 last year to QBs who are 50 and 74 and haven't played in decades is patently retarded, but go ahead and keep trotting it out there as if you remotely have a point.
You seem to forget that Dak beat Green Bay and Romo didn't. I know it was two years ago and teams change but....:dunce

Perhaps we should bring up the fact that Romo beat the Giants when Dak can't. :unsure
 

kidd

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
2,377
In all honesty, I'm cool with riding out the season with Dak but if they had decided to replace him with Romo, I would've been cool with that as well. As long as we're winning, that's all that matters to me.

But damn. It's like blasphemy to give any type of credit to a veteran who has carried this team on his back for over a decade while criticizing the rookie who has shown his greenness at times this season.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
But damn. It's like blasphemy to give any type of credit to a veteran who has carried this team on his back for over a decade while criticizing the rookie who has shown his greenness at times this season.
And the way some people talk it's like Romo never had a bad game and carried us to all kinds of 12-2 seasons. If Dak showed his greenness this year, what was Romo against the Panthers last year? Romo looked beyond baffled in that game.

The fact is a healthy Romo this year would best case scenario get us to 12-2. So why bench Dak for a guy who at best can equal what we have done and at worst be much worse. Part of nostalgia is remembering the past as though it was better then it really was. Romo was an excellent QB but he wasn't a top 5 NFL QB most seasons.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
You are hopeless Townsend.

It's funny how you ignore and downplay how bad dak was against Minnesota and much of Philly, and parts of at least San Francisco and Baltimore. It's funny how quick you are to praise Dak for 12-2 but are so flippant about Romo for 15-4.
Because Dak is presently 12-2. Romo's record in 2014 has as much to do with his present abilities as Peyton Manning's did. He was also 12-4 in 2014 btw. But I'm sure Manning's automatically better than Dak if you ignore his precipitous physical decline in 2015.

I'm not going to return fire in kind with specious arguments that ignore or spin half the reality. Because I don't want to be right.

Oh, and comparing a 36 year old Romo who was 3-1 last year to QBs who are 50 and 74 and haven't played in decades is patently retarded, but go ahead and keep trotting it out there as if you remotely have a point.
:lol so which half of reality are you ignoring when you reference Romo's 3-1 record and pretend Dak performed poorly in Minnesota? Dak went on the road, and posted a 100+ QB rating even though some great plays of his were wiped out in ticky tack fouls.

Romo was lost for the first 58 minutes of a Giants game, God bless him, those last 2 drives were magical, but if the Giants know how to manage a clock he never gets a chance to redeem himself. After that, Romo never came back again. He was useless in Philly, it wasn't until Weeden went in that we managed to score our first TD.

Then he came back for two games and threw 2 TDs and five interceptions. He threw more interceptions in two games than Dak did in 14! Where's the spin on that? So tell me again how your 3-1 QB who posted a 27.2 in his last regular season game, that he didn't even finish deserves more respect than a kid that's thrown less interceptions this season than Romo has in a single game?
 
Last edited:

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Personally I think this dialogue has outlived its usefulness. The actual fact of the matter is that both quarterbacks are good. One has experience the other is gaining experience. It is what it is and for me I am just going with what is in place.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Personally I think this dialogue has outlived its usefulness. The actual fact of the matter is that both quarterbacks are good. One has experience the other is gaining experience. It is what it is and for me I am just going with what is in place.
Sure has.

The problem arises when certain segments with selective memory syndrome don't think it's ok to have a logical contrary opinion.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Because Dak is presently 12-2. Romo's record in 2014 has as much to do with his present abilities as Peyton Manning's did. He was also 12-4 in 2014 btw. But I'm sure Manning's automatically better than Dak if you ignore his precipitous physical decline in 2015.


:lol so which half of reality are you ignoring when you reference Romo's 3-1 record and pretend Dak performed poorly in Minnesota? Dak went on the road, and posted a 100+ QB rating even though some great plays of his were wiped out in ticky tack fouls.

Romo was lost for the first 58 minutes of a Giants game, God bless him, those last 2 drives were magical, but if the Giants know how to manage a clock he never gets a chance to redeem himself. After that, Romo never came back again. He was useless in Philly, it wasn't until Weeden went in that we managed to score our first TD.

Then he came back for two games and threw 2 TDs and five interceptions. He threw more interceptions in two games than Dak did in 14! Where's the spin on that? So tell me again how your 3-1 QB who posted a 27.2 in his last regular season game, that he didn't even finish deserves more respect than a kid that's thrown less interceptions this season than Romo has in a single game?
More spin and specious arguments.

Flush.

But you're angruh though, so congrats.
 
Top Bottom