Tony Romo

His best chance is this year. The organization has changed to make this happen. His best chance would not happen otherwise. There has been and are many people that will not give Romo any credit at all when the DC win more.
Romo was a gift to the fans of the Cowboys from Parcells. Take it, run with it, it's ok! It's ok to change your opinion about a player. He's done nothing but improve year to year in many aspects of being a football player mentally and physically. Being a competitor like this doesn't come to us normally. Be thankful we have someone that is capable to lead us to a SuperBowl.
There are at least 22-25 teams that would trade their QB for Romo right now! It's still a team game. The defense has to play better than last year...by all accountabilities it should be much better even with the loss of Scandrick.
Even with the loss of the NFL rushing leader it seems the offense is still good enough to win. The offense is in better shape now than last year before the season. No one predicted what Murray was going to do because Linehan made it happen with the overall change of the organization.
Feel good about the Cowboys now! It's ok to feel positive about the chances to win another Super Bowl! If you are negative about the DC and you are a fan, maybe you need to take stock in reality. It's a good time to be a Dallas Cowboy fan! Enjoy the Cowboys and enjoy the roller coaster called the NFL season.

I don't think anyone on this forum really discredits Romo. He's carried this team for years.

Romo is the real deal. It's why so many here are pissed about squandering away his prime years. I'm not convinced this is his best chance. Really depends on our running game especially if our D hasn't made the improvements we all hope they did.

Midswat said:

I don't think anyone on this forum really discredits Romo. He's carried this team for years.

Keep reading...

Dodger12 said:

Romo is the real deal. It's why so many here are pissed about squandering away his prime years. I'm not convinced this is his best chance. Really depends on our running game especially if our D hasn't made the improvements we all hope they did.

Keep reading...

Yes and yes.

Since the thread is here...

Anyone surprised a little that he's still taking Wednesdays off? I wonder if that's more almost-superstition since last year went so well, or if they really think he physically still needs to do that.

If I recall, his back will never fully recover so it's probably wise that he takes the day.

Besides, WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING YOU FAKE FAN!!!!

I hadn't read that his back will never recover, so that sucks to hear.

I think he probably needs the rest, and they are happy to give it to him because of the way he played last year on the same practice schedule.

cmd34 said:

If I recall, his back will never fully recover so it's probably wise that he takes the day.

Besides, WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING YOU FAKE FAN!!!!

Keep reading...

I don't think it really matters -- he obviously knows the offense like the back of his hand and it worked last year.

I am a little surprised, though, because I thought he was fine a full year+ post-surgery. My guess is he could do it, but they figure why change from last year.

I guess they can give Weeden more reps during the week. They obviously need more time to evaluate him.....

Dodger12 said:

I guess they can give Weeden more reps during the week. They obviously need more time to evaluate him.....

Keep reading...

Umm, excuse me.. Kellen Moore!

Cdgreer said:

Romo was a gift to the fans of the Cowboys from Parcells.

Keep reading...

Not too sure about that. I remember watching "Hard Knocks" when Parcells was reticent to use Romo, even telling him, "I worry about you Romo, you're a China Doll." I believe it was pressure from Jerruh and the fans coupled with continued failure to learn from mistakes on Bledsoe's part, which got Romo into that Giants game - a game in which you might remember, Romo turned around and did the exact same thing Bledsoe did to get him benched - threw a pick in the end zone. (This one returned for a TD) Then of course, Parcells threw his hands up and left, almost immediately after Romo's field goal snap fumble at the Seattle playoff game.

Cdgreer said:

If you are negative about the DC and you are a fan, maybe you need to take stock in reality.

Keep reading...

There's that word again, "negative" and so far it seems it means anything that is not pom pom waving, cheerleading, rah-rah we gone get 'em Homerism. Objectivity and critical thinking not allowed! Reality certainly isn't! Mah Gawd.

Doomsday said:

I remember watching "Hard Knocks" when Parcells was reticent to use Romo,

Keep reading...

Wasn't Hard Knocks Dave Campo one year and Wade Phillips another?

cmd34 said:

Wasn't Hard Knocks Dave Campo one year and Wade Phillips another?

Keep reading...

Could be I am thinking of the season roundup video? The one NFL films produces for each team?

cmd34 said:

Wasn't Hard Knocks Dave Campo one year and Wade Phillips another?

Keep reading...

Yes.

2002 & 2008

No fucking way Parcells would agree to Hard Knocks

Midswat said:

No fucking way Parcells would agree to Hard Knocks

Keep reading...

Yeah I stand corrected. Not on the quote, but on where I saw it uttered.

Negative and reality in my context was do you like the DC or not? Do you bitch or be negative to stir pots. A person is then objective to meet their own needs.
Parcells has said he knew Romo could be good. Could he get to Romo to teach what he could? It certainly helps that the dumbass QB at the time got himself cut due to personal habits so the DC had a reason to keep Romo.

Actually Romo was all Parcells. Jerry was on the radio that week supporting Bledsoe and and sounding like he was against Romo playing... Of course Jerry was probably still butthurt over his boy Henson washing out. (The guy Jim Garrett claimed would be as good or better than Aikman, BTW.)

Parcells has some good stuff on the change in that recent Quincy-Romo vid. He said at some point, vet QBs get to where they can't be coached anymore -- they think they've seen enough that they know it all. On that horrible pick Bledsoe threw to get him benched, the play design was to the complete opposite side of the field, and on the replay you can see the TE (I think Fasano?) open in the endzone. Who knows why Bledsoe went to the other side of the field, but Parcells himself said that was the final straw.

Cdgreer said:

Negative and reality in my context was do you like the DC or not?

Keep reading...

We can like them and even love them and still see objectively. And not be hesitant at all to do so. Nobody's gonna revoke any "fan cards."

Cdgreer said:

Do you bitch or be negative to stir pots.

Keep reading...

Nobody's just bitching or being "negative" without very good reasons. However one has to wonder about the cheerleaders and their actual motivations.

Midswat said:

No fucking way Parcells would agree to Hard Knocks

Keep reading...

But then again, none of us ever dreamed there would be any way Parcells would sign a contract with Jerruh that stipulated where the credit would go, should he win a Super Bowl. So, we never really know.

Yup, TE. Jerry complained on Tuesday about Romo taking over for Bledsoe. He wanted to stick with Bledsoe, which meant that we should have definitely done the opposite thing. Bledsoe was washed up in Buffalo. He should have been making wine at that point rather than ruining our season.

Also, Jerry's reasoning for sticking with Bledsoe was that it was "too early to give up on the season" essentially. Fuck Jerry.

Those next few weeks were some of the best times I've ever had as a Cowboys fan. It was so fun to watch Romo emerge and spark the team. I remember that some fan hung his name up in the ROH at one point. People were pumped and we started winning. Romo did some of his Houdini stuff. Parcells was kissing dudes all over the sidelines. It was a great emergence after watching all those shitty years from 1996 to that point.