When Romo is completely healthy, who do you play?

[Smitty]

Pulling a QB is always a matter of judgment based on interpretation of facts, not the raw facts themselves. If so, there would be an objective standard in place, like once a QB throws X interceptions, he gets pulled.

The fact that you can't, or refuse to, realize this tells me all I need to know about your extremism on this subject.

 

[NoDak]

It's an extreme example to prove a point.

How convenient.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Pulling a QB is always a matter of judgment based on interpretation of facts, not the raw facts themselves. If so, there would be an objective standard in place, like once a QB throws X interceptions, he gets pulled.

The fact that you can't, or refuse to, realize this tells me all I need to know about your extremism on this subject.

Correct.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Pulling a QB is always a matter of judgment based on interpretation of facts, not the raw facts themselves. If so, there would be an objective standard in place, like once a QB throws X interceptions, he gets pulled.

The fact that you can't, or refuse to, realize this tells me all I need to know about your extremism on this subject.

And when you ignore half the facts by saying it doesn't matter what Dak does, then your opinion is based on a faulty set of facts. And tells me all I need to know about your opinion.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

How convenient.

Why is that convenient? It's ridiculous to hide behind an opinion and say "you can't prove me wrong so it's a valid opinion."

 

[Smitty]

And when you ignore half the facts by saying it doesn't matter what Dak does, then your opinion is based on a faulty set of facts. And tells me all I need to know about your opinion.

I'm not ignoring any facts. Sorry that your panties get twisted that my criteria is Romo's experience, his much longer record of success, and his senior status, but those are the factors that are important to me.

So you are correct that Dak can't compile, statistically, any argument to overcome those factors because it's impossible since he's a rookie. And I flat out admitted that -- Dak really can't win this job without returning serve to Romo first in my book since Romo was so recently an MVP candidate. That wouldn't be the case if Romo recently went 5-11, but he didn't.

Maybe what you mean to say is that you disagree with my belief that Romo has earned the right to keep the job based on those factors but they certainly aren't factually flawed.

 

[townsend]

As a huge Romo fan, I really don't want to see him put back out there.

Best case scenario he runs the offense just as well as Dak. So there's no benefit. Worst case scenario we have to watch him reenact the Thanksgiving game. Maybe I'm the only one, but I was a little relieved when he went down because that game was such an embarrassment. That was the only good team Romo played all year. He eaked out wins against awful Dolphins and Giants teams, and Weeden threw the only TD in an Eagle game that Romo was not effective in.

I think our current team could have won that Thanksgiving game.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I'm not ignoring any facts. Sorry that your panties get twisted that my criteria is Romo's experience, his much longer record of success, and his senior status, but those are the factors that are important to me.

So you are correct that Dak can't compile, statistically, any argument to overcome those factors because it's impossible since he's a rookie. And I flat out admitted that -- Dak really can't win this job without returning serve to Romo first in my book since Romo was so recently an MVP candidate. That wouldn't be the case if Romo recently went 5-11, but he didn't.

Maybe what you mean to say is that you disagree with my belief that Romo has earned the right to keep the job based on those factors but they certainly aren't factually flawed.

The only person whose panties are in a wad is yourself. And yes, ignoring what Dak does makes your opinion factually flawed. It's very simple. Dak could be the most amazing QB ever in the history and you're basically covering your eyes and saying that doesn't matter, you would put Romo in. That's a childish opinion.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

As a huge Romo fan, I really don't want to see him put back out there.

Best case scenario he runs the offense just as well as Dak. So there's no benefit. Worst case scenario we have to watch him reenact the Thanksgiving game. Maybe I'm the only one, but I was a little relieved when he went down because that game was such an embarrassment. That was the only good team Romo played all year. He eaked out wins against awful Dolphins and Giants teams, and Weeden threw the only TD in an Eagle game that Romo was not effective in.

I think our current team could have won that Thanksgiving game.

If we need Romo at some point this year he will always be there. We just don't need him right now. I'm certainly not saying that at some point this season I wouldn't see the need to play Romo. That situation could very well arise. But you don't change things just for the sake of change. Right now we have no need to make a change at QB.

 

[VA Cowboy]

Definitely Dak. I had thought that if we lost at least 2 of the last 3 I'd be OK with Romo starting even if Dak wasn't the cause for the losses. But now that we won all 3 and are 5-1 there is no way I'd replace Dak and risk ruining the chemistry and momentum we have now.

 

[GForce78NJ]

probably wont find out until next week anyway. I bet Jerry gets pressure from the rest of the staff to start Dak, but at the end of the day this is a good situation to be in. We have two top 15 QBs on our roster, probably top 10. I'll take that any day over should we start Matt Cassell or Kellen Moore?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

probably wont find out until next week anyway. I bet Jerry gets pressure from the rest of the staff to start Dak, but at the end of the day this is a good situation to be in. We have two top 15 QBs on our roster, probably top 10. I'll take that any day over should we start Matt Cassell or Kellen Moore?

I think you'll see a situation similar to what the Broncos did with Osweiler and Manning. Well except that Dak isn't bad like Osweiler. The Broncos had a healthy Manning and then continued to play Osweiler the entire time. But when push came to shove and it looked like Osweiler was going to fail they went back to Manning.

I think you'll see the same move with Dak and Romo. Except Dak isn't Osweiler and I don't know if he will ever relinquish the job or put the Cowboys in a situation where the season is slipping away if you don't put Romo in.

 

[townsend]

I gotta wonder if Romo's recovery timeline didn't get Jerry'ed. Seems like he's more than a couple weeks away from taking the field. I wonder if this is one of those Darren Woodson scenarios where they were planning on pushing his return date back as the season moves on, until they're forced to IR him, or a miracle happens.

 

[Smitty]

The only person whose panties are in a wad is yourself. And yes, ignoring what Dak does makes your opinion factually flawed.

So which of my facts is incorrect?

It's very simple. Dak could be the most amazing QB ever in the history and you're basically covering your eyes and saying that doesn't matter, you would put Romo in. That's a childish opinion.

Dak isn't the best QB in the history of ever, though, so that's not what I'm doing.

But yes, Dak cannot obtain the traits that I prefer in Romo in the span of time it takes Romo to come back. Eventually Romo would decline and that is when Dak would get the nod. We've covered this. I've already admitted that I am applying the "Romo basically can't lose his job to injury" theory here. It would have to be remarkably extraordinary for me to change my mind. Conversely, I'm of the opinion that a not insubstantial amount of what Dak is doing is because of the benefit of the running game and the OL (though this would apply to Romo as well obviously).

Sorry you are so upset that this is my opinion, but it is, in fact, a valid opinion, despite the fact that it is different than yours and you are wearing blinders and can't see that.

I might be incorrect in the long term as to which approach might net more playoff success but you don't know that any better than I do right now.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Sorry you are so upset that this is my opinion, but it is, in fact, a valid opinion, despite the fact that it is different than yours and you are wearing blinders and can't see that.

You don't upset me, could care less if you want to live in denial. So I'll move on and let you live in a world where Dak could beat the world and you'll still be sour. I think you even know your position is silly but you just enjoy arguing and hate admitting you're wrong.

 

[Smitty]

Nobody is sour about Dak playing well; that's what you guys don't seem to understand most of all. We are quite happy Dak is playing well and that he appears to be a long term starter.

Might get a little sour when we say "We think Romo gives us the best chance to win moving forward" and then someone says that is factually incorrect, as if facts could actually prove or disprove that stance.

I have stated many times we simply disagree on who is the better option long term and I am willing to agree to disagree but some can't accept that divide and keep trying to "prove" something that really isn't proveable.

If and when Romo gets back in we will find out; my position is that I'm willing to find out even if it costs us a regular season loss or two, because the upside of that gamble paying off means you have a more qualified playoff QB. Since that statement is all preference, judgment and speculation there is no "factually wrong" about it.

 

[E_D_Guapo]

If and when Romo gets back in we will find out; my position is that I'm willing to find out even if it costs us a regular season loss or two, because the upside of that gamble paying off means you have a more qualified playoff QB.

This is where I differ. I am not willing to find out if it costs a regular season loss or two because the playoffs are not a foregone conclusion. One or two losses because of shaky games by a rusty QB can be the difference in getting in and staying home.

Obviously that is taking the pessimistic view; Romo could come back and be good enough or just flat out good. Wouldn't be shocking. But I sure wouldn't bet on it and am not going to pull Dak as long as he is rolling like this in order to find out. Especially given that Romo has had such limited work over the past two seasons. He has barely played in games, got regular days off in training camps and doesn't practice on Wednesdays. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he is going to be good out of the gate. It would be an entirely different story if Dak were playing mediocre football but he is playing at a pretty high level right now as evidenced by what we see on the field as well as his QB rating.

 

[L.T. Fan]

This is where I differ. I am not willing to find out if it costs a regular season loss or two because the playoffs are not a foregone conclusion. One or two losses because of shaky games by a rusty QB can be the difference in getting in and staying home.

Obviously that is taking the pessimistic view; Romo could come back and be good enough or just flat out good. Wouldn't be shocking. But I sure wouldn't bet on it and am not going to pull Dak as long as he is rolling like this in order to find out. Especially given that Romo has had such limited work over the past two seasons. He has barely played in games, got regular days off in training camps and doesn't practice on Wednesdays. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence that he is going to be good out of the gate. It would be an entirely different story if Dak were playing mediocre football but he is playing at a pretty high level right now as evidenced by what we see on the field as well as his QB rating.

If Dallas gets to the playoffs who do you want to lead the way?

 

[Cotton]

If Dallas gets to the playoffs who do you want to lead the way?

If you made me choose right now, it would be Dak.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I have stated many times we simply disagree on who is the better option long term and I am willing to agree to disagree but some can't accept that divide and keep trying to "prove" something that really isn't proveable.

If you want to argue that Romo is the superior QB, that is a discussion. If you want to say it doesn't matter what Dak does, Romo should have the job back, that's not a discussion, that's a factually flawed argument. That's all I'm saying.