How one play defined a stellar career

[chevycowboys]

That video just reinforces what we already knew. Garrett and Jerry wasted a hall of fame caliber QB's career with shitty coaching & personnel moves.

Just like they are gonna continue to do with Dak and Zeke if this shit keeps going like it has been.

 

[Genghis Khan]

None of that has anything to do with Romo.

It has to do with Romo because the position isn't settled yet. It has to do with Romo because Romo still has the ability to play at a much higher level than what we have. And we no longer have Romo because the organization made a deliberate decision to not have him.

People lamented losing Murray for a long time and for a lot of the same reasons. Then we got Zeke and Murray instantly wasn't relevant anymore.

It's the same thing with Romo. It's hard to move on when he's better than what we have, and we got rid of him on purpose.

The injury thing is a legitimate concern obviously, but I'd rather roll the dice with my best shot.

I also think most young QBs are better off sitting behind a competent veteran, Dak included, and I think that is showing its head right now too. Hell, I still wonder if we shouldn't have brought back Sanchez, who seemed to be helping Dak last year.

As far as I'm concerned this organization screwed up the whole QB situation dating back to when Romo got healthy, and it rightfully still bothers me because we're still living with the effects of it.

 

[L.T. Fan]

It has to do with Romo because the position isn't settled yet. It has to do with Romo because Romo still has the ability to play at a much higher level than what we have. And we no longer have Romo because the organization made a deliberate decision to not have him.

People lamented losing Murray for a long time and for a lot of the same reasons. Then we got Zeke and Murray instantly wasn't relevant anymore.

It's the same thing with Romo. It's hard to move on when he's better than what we have, and we got rid of him on purpose.

The injury thing is a legitimate concern obviously, but I'd rather roll the dice with my best shot.

I also think most young QBs are better off sitting behind a competent veteran, Dak included, and I think that is showing its head right now too. Hell, I still wonder if we shouldn't have brought back Sanchez, who seemed to be helping Dak last year.

As far as I'm concerned this organization screwed up the whole QB situation dating back to when Romo got healthy, and it rightfully still bothers me because we're still living with the effects of it.

That’s the way a lot of we’re leaning. I just got fatigued trying to make the point because Prescott was doing well and the consensus couldn’t conceive that he would struggle his sophamore season. The schemes for his freshman debut were so that he didn’t have to make decisions. He got thrown into the mix this season and was expected to execute with the full playbook this season and he wasn’t ready. Most QB’s would struggle with that circumstance. He might get better and that’s my hopes because he has all the physical tools for the position. He will have to learn the heady part of the position or he will continue to struggle.

 

[Cotton]

It has to do with Romo because the position isn't settled yet. It has to do with Romo because Romo still has the ability to play at a much higher level than what we have. And we no longer have Romo because the organization made a deliberate decision to not have him.

People lamented losing Murray for a long time and for a lot of the same reasons. Then we got Zeke and Murray instantly wasn't relevant anymore.

It's the same thing with Romo. It's hard to move on when he's better than what we have, and we got rid of him on purpose.

The injury thing is a legitimate concern obviously, but I'd rather roll the dice with my best shot.

I also think most young QBs are better off sitting behind a competent veteran, Dak included, and I think that is showing its head right now too. Hell, I still wonder if we shouldn't have brought back Sanchez, who seemed to be helping Dak last year.

As far as I'm concerned this organization screwed up the whole QB situation dating back to when Romo got healthy, and it rightfully still bothers me because we're still living with the effects of it.

Romo has obviously shown he can't even begin to take a hit and stay on the field. That makes this a moot conversation, which was my point to begin with. It's a stupid discussion, and was last year, too.

 

[p1_]

Romo has obviously shown he can't even begin to take a hit and stay on the field. That makes this a moot conversation, which was my point to begin with. It's a stupid discussion, and was last year, too.

Plus, if Romo were so determined to prove to the world that he should still be out there winning football games and wouldn’t be writhing on the ground in pain from yet another hit, he most certainly would have gone to another team.

 

[p1_]

The ONLY reason we’re having this same conversation is Daks play and obvious struggles this year. He’s been good and he’s been really bad. And recently, he’s been consistently bad, and that’s a problem.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Plus, if Romo were so determined to prove to the world that he should still be out there winning football games and wouldn’t be writhing on the ground in pain from yet another hit, he most certainly would have gone to another team.

Yeah Romo recognized that his body was done. And frankly so did 31 other NFL teams.

 

[data]

I have an issue with the title of this thread. I say this as a Romo fanboy, but the title is completely absolutely false. You can't tell me that The Bobble is the defining moment, meaning that anything happening thereafter is inconsequential. No, 2011-2013 defined Romo’s career.

For The Bobble, people recognize that Romo was a holder and it was his first year starting. The playoff appearance itself was an overachievement, it seemed, and the Cowboys weren't Super-Bowl favorites by any means.

Years 6, 7 and 8 as a starter, though, and he’s tossing multiple INTs to lose games with double digit leads. The multiple Week 17 do-or-die losses, including the walk-off INT at Wash. MNF and he’s tossing 5 INTs to the Bears. Has a glorious game vs the Broncos only to toss the walk-off INT.

I'll go so far and say this. Not even winning the Super Bowl, if we make the playoffs at least twice during 2011-2013 by virtue of winning those Week 17 do-or-die games (or even not losing those midseason crushing defeats causing the do-or-die), Romo's career narrative would be much more positive. The Bobble wouldn't be as prominent as it is now...assuming he doesn't throw a walk-off INT in those additional playoff appearances, of course.

Steve Young, Elway and Peyton were all losers/chokers and changed their narrative when they won the big one. Romo’s post-Bobble career only served to solidify his narrative.

 

[p1_]

It was a microcosm for much of his career. Not quite being able to pull off the big win. The near misses and late season swoons in December. So close, and yet so far.

 

[1bigfan13]

I have an issue with the title of this thread. I say this as a Romo fanboy, but the title is completely absolutely false. You can't tell me that The Bobble is the defining moment, meaning that anything happening thereafter is inconsequential. No, 2011-2013 defined Romo’s career.

For The Bobble, people recognize that Romo was a holder and it was his first year starting. The playoff appearance itself was an overachievement, it seemed, and the Cowboys weren't Super-Bowl favorites by any means.

Years 6, 7 and 8 as a starter, though, and he’s tossing multiple INTs to lose games with double digit leads. The multiple Week 17 do-or-die losses, including the walk-off INT at Wash. MNF and he’s tossing 5 INTs to the Bears. Has a glorious game vs the Broncos only to toss the walk-off INT.

I'll go so far and say this. Not even winning the Super Bowl, if we make the playoffs at least twice during 2011-2013 by virtue of winning those Week 17 do-or-die games (or even not losing those midseason crushing defeats causing the do-or-die), Romo's career narrative would be much more positive. The Bobble wouldn't be as prominent as it is now...assuming he doesn't throw a walk-off INT in those additional playoff appearances, of course.

Steve Young, Elway and Peyton were all losers/chokers and changed their narrative when they won the big one. Romo’s post-Bobble career only served to solidify his narrative.

I think the title is appropriate.

I interpret it kind of like you hinted at in your post.

Despite being a good QB and playing well, the big games usually ended with Romo finding the banana peel. In that Seattle playoff game for instance, after the Seahawks rallied to take the lead, Romo drove the Cowboys the length of the field with about 4 minutes to play. He had us in position to win the game on what was essentially an XP and he found the banana peel on what is considered one of the more routine plays in football.

So I can see why the writer says that one play defined a stellar career.

 

[data]

I think the title is appropriate.

I interpret it kind of like you hinted at in your post.

Despite being a good QB and playing well, the big games usually ended with Romo finding the banana peel. In that Seattle playoff game for instance, after the Seahawks rallied to take the lead, Romo drove the Cowboys the length of the field with about 4 minutes to play. He had us in position to win the game on what was essentially an XP and he found the banana peel on what is considered one of the more routine plays in football.

So I can see why the writer says that one play defined a stellar career.

Put it that way and I can agree it epitomizes or symbolically poetically represents his career. I took a harder stance on the interpretation of the word ‘defined’

 

[L.T. Fan]

I think the title is appropriate.

I interpret it kind of like you hinted at in your post.

Despite being a good QB and playing well, the big games usually ended with Romo finding the banana peel. In that Seattle playoff game for instance, after the Seahawks rallied to take the lead, Romo drove the Cowboys the length of the field with about 4 minutes to play. He had us in position to win the game on what was essentially an XP and he found the banana peel on what is considered one of the more routine plays in football.

So I can see why the writer says that one play defined a stellar career.

I think its pretty lame to use the example of the extra point bobble as defining a career. He was filling in and its one play being applied as an eraser to a great career as a quarterback in the NFL. What about the records being held for passing for the franchise? Wouldn't that be more appropriate if you were being objective? Super Bowls would be nice but that's a team trophy.

 

[1bigfan13]

I think its pretty lame to use the example of the extra point bobble as defining a career. He was filling in and its one play being applied as an eraser to a great career as a quarterback in the NFL. What about the records being held for passing for the franchise? Wouldn't that be more appropriate if you were being objective? Super Bowls would be nice but that's a team trophy.

I hate to break it to you but performances in the playoffs and those "win or go home" games are what define any QBs legacy. It's why virtually no one mentions Dan Marino as being the best QB of all time despite him dominating most of the NFL passing records. Even before Brady and Manning started taking down his records, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd rank Marino as the best QB of all time.

Yes Romo set a ton franchise records and was a remarkable QB for most of his career, but as we've pointed out, in many of those big late season and playoff games a gaff by Romo often led to the Cowboys losing.

When you make memorable mistakes in those moments, fair or not, those mistakes are what end up defining the player's career.

 

[p1_]

I think its pretty lame to use the example of the extra point bobble as defining a career. He was filling in and its one play being applied as an eraser to a great career as a quarterback in the NFL. What about the records being held for passing for the franchise? Wouldn't that be more appropriate if you were being objective? Super Bowls would be nice but that's a team trophy.

And what do you think springs to folks minds when you mention Leon Lett?

 

[1bigfan13]

And what do you think springs to folks minds when you mention Leon Lett?

Exactly my point.

Despite Lett being one of the most disruptive DTs of his era people will always associate him with the gaffs at the Super Bowl and during Thanksgiving 1993. Because moments like those stick out like a sore thumb.

The general public doesn't give a damn and won't remember that Romo lit up the Redskins for 350 yards and a 3 TDs in a ho-hum week 10 game. But late season mistakes like that end of game INT vs the Redskins in 2012 are etched into everyone's memory.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I hate to break it to you but performances in the playoffs and those "win or go home" games are what define any QBs legacy. It's why virtually no one mentions Dan Marino as being the best QB of all time despite him dominating most of the NFL passing records. Even before Brady and Manning started taking down his records, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd rank Marino as the best QB of all time.

Yes Romo set a ton franchise records and was a remarkable QB for most of his career, but as we've pointed out, in many of those big late season and playoff games a gaff by Romo often led to the Cowboys losing.

When you make memorable mistakes in those moments, fair or not, those mistakes are what end up defining the player's career.

I can agree the media shapes things from a negative and antagonistic way but I don’t let that shape what I know more than they do and have seen more than they have. I come to my own conclusions based on that. If one can only accept the sensational tag lines from them then they will just have to come to a shaped media tag line.

 

[data]

I hate to break it to you but performances in the playoffs and those "win or go home" games are what define any QBs legacy. It's why virtually no one mentions Dan Marino as being the best QB of all time despite him dominating most of the NFL passing records. Even before Brady and Manning started taking down his records, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd rank Marino as the best QB of all time.

Yes Romo set a ton franchise records and was a remarkable QB for most of his career, but as we've pointed out, in many of those big late season and playoff games a gaff by Romo often led to the Cowboys losing.

When you make memorable mistakes in those moments, fair or not, those mistakes are what end up defining the player's career.

what the hell, I've got the time with the holidays...Taking 1bigfan13's point above about the playoff games...

Some statistical (for you @L.T. Fan) perspective on the contrast with Aikman's celebrated-yet-pedestrian-stats-career vs Romo's dubious-legacy-with-all-the-franchise-records-career.

From 1992-1995, during the regular season, Aikman's average-per-game stats are 18/28 (66%), 209 yards and 1.1 TD, 0.7 INT. During the same stretch, his playoff stats (11 games including the 1994 NFCC loss) are 21/30 (68%), 265 yards and 1.9 TD, 0.7 INT.

From that, Aikman's performed significantly better against the elevated competition and stakes of the playoffs.

For Romo, I used his four playoff seasons (2006, 2007, 2009 and 2014), also his four Pro Bowl seasons, and also excluded his 3-INT pro debut vs the 2006 NY Giants. His average-per-game stats during the regular season was 21/32 (66%), 264 yards and 2.0 TD, 0.8 INT.

For his six playoff games, Romo averaged per-game 19/31 (62%), 219 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.3 INT.

If you want to include his three do-or-die games (2012 Wash, 2011 NYG, 2008 PHI) as 'playoff games' as well, then the 9 games average becomes 20/33 (62%), 223 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.8 INT.
--------
Overall, Romo may have the franchise records for regular season, but his performance drop-off in elimination games is noticeable. Furthermore, if you thought Romo's regular season stats are awesome, Aikman's playoff stats are essentially identical to Romo's 'heralded' regular season stats in an era when passing was less prolific.

 

[p1_]

what the hell, I've got the time with the holidays...Taking 1bigfan13's point above about the playoff games...

Some statistical (for you [MENTION=11]L.T. Fan[/MENTION]) perspective on the contrast with Aikman's celebrated-yet-pedestrian-stats-career vs Romo's dubious-legacy-with-all-the-franchise-records-career.

From 1992-1995, during the regular season, Aikman's average-per-game stats are 18/28 (66%), 209 yards and 1.1 TD, 0.7 INT. During the same stretch, his playoff stats (11 games including the 1994 NFCC loss) are 21/30 (68%), 265 yards and 1.9 TD, 0.7 INT.

From that, Aikman's performed significantly better against the elevated competition and stakes of the playoffs.

For Romo, I used his playoff seasons (2006, 2007, 2009 and 2014) and also excluded his 3-INT pro debut vs the 2006 NY Giants. His average-per-game stats during the regular season was 21/32 (66%), 264 yards and 2.0 TD, 0.8 INT.

For his six playoff games, Romo averaged per-game 19/31 (62%), 219 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.3 INT.

If you want to include his three do-or-die games (2012 Wash, 2011 NYG, 2008 PHI) as 'playoff games' as well, then the 9 games average becomes 20/33 (62%), 223 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.8 INT.
--------
Overall, Romo may have the franchise records for regular season, but his performance drop-off in elimination games is noticeable. Furthermore, Aikman's playoff stats are almost identical to 'heralded' Romo's regular season stats in an era where passing was less prolific.

Troy was at his best in postseason, his ass rose to the occasion, without question.

 

[L.T. Fan]

what the hell, I've got the time with the holidays...Taking 1bigfan13's point above about the playoff games...

Some statistical (for you @L.T. Fan) perspective on the contrast with Ay66ikman's celebrated-yet-pedestrian-stats-career vs Romo's dubious-legacy-with-all-the-franchise-records-career.

From 1992-1995, during the regular season, Aikman's average-per-game stats are 18/28 (66%), 209 yards and 1.1 TD, 0.7 INT. During the same stretch, his playoff stats (11 games including the 1994 NFCC loss) are 21/30 (68%), 265 yards and 1.9 TD, 0.7 INT.

From that, Aikman's performed significantly better against the elevated competition and stakes of the playoffs.

For Romo, I used his four playoff seasons (2006, 2007, 2009 and 2014), also his four Pro Bowl seasons, and also excluded his 3-INT pro debut vs the 2006 NY Giants. His average-per-game stats during the regular season was 21/32 (66%), 264 yards and 2.0 TD, 0.8 INT.

For his six playoff games, Romo averaged per-game 19/31 (62%), 219 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.3 INT.

If you want to include his three do-or-die games (2012 Wash, 2011 NYG, 2008 PHI) as 'playoff games' as well, then the 9 games average becomes 20/33 (62%), 223 yards, 1.3 TD, 0.8 INT.
--------
Overall, Romo may have the franchise records for regular season, but his performance drop-off in elimination games is noticeable. Furthermore, if you thought Romo's regular season stats are awesome, Aikman's playoff stats are essentially identical to Romo's 'heralded' regular season stats in an era when passing was less prolific.

I’m not sure I follow this at all. It seems there are created stats from created games and some are substituted for playoff games. Why would there be a need to do this other than to refute the actual stats. Aikman didn’t have huge stats because there was no need to pass the ball as much due to Emmitt Smith’s production on the ground game. This was the circumstance in the Cowboys hey day games.

I haven’t quite figured out why there is a need to create game conditions to show that Romo was something other than his actual production which earned him the records.

I appreciate the efforts expended but I have to admit I am a little lost on the reason to structure things that aren’t actual. Maybe I am missing something here.

 

[ravidubey]

Furthermore, if you thought Romo's regular season stats are awesome, Aikman's playoff stats are essentially identical to Romo's 'heralded' regular season stats in an era when passing was less prolific.

This is a critical difference that people in the fantasy football era didn't get about Aikman in particular and the playoffs in general.

It's all about the QB in the postseason.

Of course it damned well helps having the #1 defense, #1 rusher, elite WR and TE, and one of the all-time great OL's.