Why does it have to be one or the other?

How about a top 15 offense led by a top 15 QB, with the defense they have right now?

Because that's basically what we're asking for here. There's no reason to talk extremes...

And I think that's what they should be, with Alex Smith, Jamaal Charles, Dwayne Bowe, Donnie Avery, Dextor McHemingway, (hopefully) Anthony Fasano, Anthony Sherman, and an offensive line that should be slowly adjusting to and gelling within the new scheme.

That's what I'd like to see by January.

Until he throws the inevitable back breaking INT

The issue is that the line isn't gelling, Hemingway hasn't seperated himself and Fasano has barely been on the field.

Alex Smith is a limited game manager but he's even more limited when the line sucks and there's no one to catch the ball.

I don't like Tony Romo. At all. I think he's overhyped and has done little of real substantial note in the league. But I also find it funny how people point about the int while ignoring the 500 yards and 5 TDs that were the only reason Dallas was even in the game at all in the first place.

While the Oakland game was obviously the ols worst game, I thought they had been gradually getting better each game.

And I thought they played pretty well int he second half Sunday?

But in the end, as he's proven so many times, it doesn't matter how many yards and TD's, he inevitably costs Dallas the big win.

It's kind of a chicken and egg thing.

Yeah he's had some bad plays, but he's also been the reason they're in the position.

IMO, he's carried a shitty roster in Dallas for the past 3 or 4 years.

The line was adequate from about midway through the 1st quarter Sunday, Hemingway isn't going to get a real shot because they keep throwing the useless midget on the field, and Fasano will hopefully be back Sunday.

And Alex Smith's problems right now appear primarily to be his own. His accuracy has abandoned him, and he's so risk-averse that he's not giving anyone a chance to catch the ball.

I'm also sure there's more to it, since I also don't know what routes are being run, or what the comfort level is between receivers and QB. But he's the guy they traded for and he's the guy they've made the face of the team, so he gets to shoulder the load. It's part of the job, as much as we try to make it everyone's fault but his.

Romo is Brett Favre without the big wins plain and simple.

First off, I've never excused Smith. He had an awful game on Sunday.

But it's been clear since the Dallas game that the interior line is struggling to pas protect and open holes for Charles. Fisher has been awful and the team rarely runs to the right side of the line.

Losing Fasano was a killer, especially coupled with the loss of Kelce.

All of these factors have further exposed Smith, which is why the team is struggling offensively.

You're not going to win many games when you give up 51. He's sort of the one legged-man that lost the ass-kicking contest.

Here's an interesting question to ponder: what would the Chiefs record be with Tony Romo? Would he have cost them games to this point because of his predilection towards head-scratching picks? Or is the defense good enough that it wouldn't matter? Would the offense be scoring more? And have we won games because of key plays by Alex Smith that could only be made by Alex Smith? Has he been a difference maker in the 6-0 start beyond "he doesn't turn it over"?

Ive been very disappointed in the O-line. It feels like almost every pass play Smith is under pressure or rushed.

i go back in forth on Romo....but im mostly with Dane. It doesnt matter if he threw 5 passes a game or 50, he would find a way to screw up at a critical point in the game.

I feel like we have lightweight guys who would have been fine zone blocking running a power scheme. Strangely, Fisher is one of those guys, and he's a Dorsey guy.

Bulk Fisher up and phase our interior line out of the offense.

I'm not a fan of Romo either. I wouldn't have signed him were he available. But that wasn't the question.