Search results

They knew they would need a backup and knew Orton would not be on the team. It's documented. Weeden WAS intended as Tony's backup. That was the whole reason to sign him.

With vBookie being new to most folks here, it's fair to say they didn't realize all this. They DO make a valid point, in that hedging and ensuring low risk by betting all outcomes does build wealth. It's not in any way unfair, however.

LOL For the limited amount it COULD work, with a coaching staff making NO adjustments or changes when shit was not working. Let's just keep doing the same thing over and over expecting better results each time. And dude, Dodger is embarrassing you regarding the signing of Weeden.

Ok... You didn't see. I get that.

The few times we ran screens, they worked. No? Draw plays. But we didn't keep going back to them. The PLAY CALLING sucked. We kept on obstinately running the ball into that 8 man box, somehow expecting better results. Backs running up the ass of linemen, blocks missed, etc. The entire offense...

During the game, in the weekly game thread, I posted about this. That Dallas needed to change the whole philosophy, go full-on attack mode and let the chips fall. They didn't. Opening the 4th quarter I was screaming at the TV, for Vaughan. He stayed on the sideline. It was the whole offense...

I'm in this same boat Pal, but I'm not putting it ALL on Weeden. The whole offense was out of synch - receivers running wrong routes, people missing blocks, dropped passes, RBs running up the ass of o-linemen and missing the actual holes - the whole thing was dysfunctional.

If you're gonna put all your eggs in one basket, don't lament when the basket gets toppled and all your eggs are gone. :smile1

Strum - another Romosexual heard from. It's never Romo when HE has a bad game. It's the moon, the stars, the ducks in the pond. He's in love.

And there are many reasons for this, the entire offense was out of synch and it wasn't just Weeden. See above post.

Maybe it was 2nd quarter? I only know that the ONE time we went spread, we were driving. (NOT counting the meaningless last drive.) Hey it's really this simple - you Romosexuals won't apply the same standards when Romo has a bad game, to the backups. When Romo has a bad game, it's every fucking...

Early to mid 3rd quarter, the drive started with the spread and was successful. Until two drops by Dez ended it.

It was based on QB safety, rather than attacking the D. Weeden was just fine with the plays vs. Washington and led us to 10 points on two drives. We were not. Attacking. The. Defense Sunday. And it showed.

You're talking ONLY about that last drive, and not remembering the all-out spread we ran early in the 3rd quarter, which was working. Look, obviously the game plan was set on Wednesday, with the thought that Romo would be playing. Therefore it was designed to protect HIM, not to attack the...

I didn't lose any vCash. I removed over 100,000 worth that I had. But I assume you're not including me as a "dolt" for this. That was the whole idea. Allowing multiple bets on the events added the ability to hedge, limit losses, or take big risks to come up big. The point others are making is...

But that was NOT after major, invasive disk surgery. No comparison at all.

Product of the horrible game plan and play calling. Explain how he suddenly got sharp the two times we went into all-out air raid, spread mode.

He wasn't sharp, no question. But you can GET sharp when the offense is in attack mode, which when it was he was accurate. The two times they opened it up, he delivered.

Will you guys PLEASE understand it wasn't so much Weeden, but the weak livered GAME PLAN and play calling that neutered the offense Sunday? Every time Dallas went into attack mode with the spread Sunday, it worked. But that was only twice, once in the 3rd quarter and then the meaningless drive...

Tony Romo himself couldn't have overcome the lousy offensive game plan employed by Dallas Sunday. Gimme Weeden, but gimme a ATTACK game plan not a "safe mode" one. I sure as hell do.