Blogging The Boys: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Spencer Hall's Sports Meme Power Rankings

You're Just Not That Into Romo? Who's Your Alternative?

Let's be plain about it.  Tony Romo was awful Sunday.  He decided the Cowboys loss.  He gift-wrapped 10 points for the Steelers with two poor throws.  He made many more bad decisions.  He showed none of the accuracy we're come to expect.  He showed, for the first time I can recall, signs of "Drew Bledsoe Syndrome," feeling a rush that often wasn't near. 

Consequently, that vocal faction which emerges after every Cowboys loss is in full roar.  He'd done, they say.  Draft a QB to challenge him. 

To paraphrase the long-departed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, you go to battle with the QB you have.  It's easy to look over the fence at other shiny QB alternatives sitting in other teams' driveways, but seriously, which other teams have QBs they absolutely, positively can trust to do better?  It's a very short list.

 

Star-divide

Let's start in the other conference.  And no, you can't name Tom Brady. He's on IR.  Who would you take in Tony's place?  Ben Roethisberger?  He's got a ring on his finger.  He also had a 22 QB rating in his championship game, a 9 of 21, 134 yard,, 2 INT howler.  He benefitted that day, as he did Sunday, from a stellar defense and a more error-prone opposition.

Philip Rivers?  His line in '06, when his team was 14-2, was Aikmanesque.  Lots of TD, very few picks.  He had a gutty playoff win over the Colts last year when he played on one leg.  He's got a good line this year.  

He also went one and out in that '06 campaign.  Conversely, he's been the one constant in San Diego's dismal year.  I'll list him as a maybe.

Peyton Manning?  Ah, now you're talking.  Pure class.  The prototype. Let's look at Peyton's steely, peerless playoff record at a similar career point to Romo's.  This will show Terrible Tony what a good QB's line looks like:

  • '99 --  Leads Indy to a 13-3 record.  Goes one and out in the playoffs.
  • '00 -- Gets team to the wild card round.  Loses 23-17 to Miami.
  • '02 -- Returns to wild card round.  Loses 41-0.  Throws 14 of 31 for 134 yards and two picks.

What a loser!  Why is he even in this discussion?  And why did the stupid Colts hang on to him?

Who else do you like in that conference?  Jay Cutler?  Is he any more certain than Romo?

Let's move to the NFC 

Who do you like here?  Drew Brees?  He was in MVP contention and will probably get some hardware.  That defenseless Saints team rides on his shoulders. Still, he's 1-6 in his last seven matchups against winning teams, with a 9-11 TD-to-Int. ratio.  That doesn't scream "clutch" to me.

He failed his "pressure game" two weeks ago in Tampa Bay, when he threw two picks on New Orleans' last two drives.  The first one gave Tampa their game winning field goal.  The second sealed the loss and probably knocked his team out of the wild card race.

Kurt Warner?  He was getting serious MVP mojo and then was outplayed in back-to- back losses by Eli Manning and Donovan McNabb.  Warner committed five turnovers in those games, with a key fumble that tipped a see-saw game towards New York. 

Who else has that cool, dependable hand?  Aaron Rogers?  Matt Hasselbeck?  Jake Delhomme?  Donovan McNabb?   He's hot again, but his fans were chasing him with pitchforks two games ago when he admitted he didn't know games could end in ties.  

The only QB who can throw stones in the conference is Eli Manning and he's got the best running game in football to ease his burden.

Romo could fold these last three weeks and drive the Cowboys Nation to apoplexy.  He could also bounce back, as he did after last year's five-pick Buffalo abomination, when he went on an eight-game tear that averaged 268 yards, and saw him throw 22 TDs to 6 picks. That insouciant smirk that so infuriates the haters is also his best weapon.  He has not yet let bad games keep him down. 

You can't judge QBs in a vacuum, especially with Tom Brady out of the picture.  A holistic view shows that the Aikman-Brady standard is largely missing in this year's NFL.  Romo isn't perfect, but if he can get to the post season, he'll be no more blemished than the rest of the QB field. 

Or course, getting there depends on the return of the good Tony.  Stay tuned.

 

 

 

 

0 recs  |  Comment 199 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I agree

There’s only about 3 or 4 guys starting in the NFL that I’d take over Romo today:
1) Drew Brees
2) Tom Brady
3) Payton Manning

With Brady’s injury, I’m not sure he’s going to be what he once was.
Payton is a little long in the tooth.

Brees may really be the only one I’d take in a swap with Romo right now!

Hey, Tony had a bad day, but so did Namath, Montana, Marino, and Elway.

We’re gonna win the big one with this guy as our QB sooner or later.

by BishopWest on Dec 9, 2008 10:51 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Romo Haters...

Go find your old Drew Henson jerseys. Tony’s play isn’t the most consistant play, obviously, but he is the best thing that has happened to the team the past 3 years outside of Ware. And to say an OLB has more of an impact than a QB is fairly foolish..

Tony has made me a believer through games such as his Buffalo comeback, his Detroit comeback, and 15+ 300 yard passing games in his short career of starting.

So keep hating… but he is going to be the leader of this team for years to come whether you like it or not

by commoncents on Dec 9, 2008 10:54 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm...

I wonder why that is…

by commoncents on Dec 9, 2008 10:58 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Great, now what am I supposed to do with this avatar........

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 12:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I spent the Arizona game

trashing Romo for being a turnover machine. As you all know, we then sat through a month of where a 15-yard pass downfield was next to impossible. I won’t be trashing Romo anymore. Anyone who thinks he should be gone may as well switch teams….the guy is going to be be here for quite a while, and I have no problem with that.

by fivetwos on Dec 9, 2008 10:57 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

What makes me laugh

is how the rippers would respond if Romo were dealt and then finished the puzzle for another team. The same people ripping him now would be screaming even louder about Jerry’s stupidity for letting him get away.

by Rafael Vela on Dec 9, 2008 10:59 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

you

live with Romo, you die with Romo.

I do get frustrated when he throws 3 picks, but he make plays that others can’t (such as the TD pass to Owens vs. Pittsburgh.) If Cowboys fans are going to praise him as the next Brett Favre when he makes an unbelievable backhand flip to Miles Austin for a first down, or grab a fumble that went over his head and run it for a first down, then you gotta take the bad with it. Yeah they could have won the game against Pittsburgh, but they showed a lot of heart, and I’d still take Romo over 3/4 of the league’s Qb’s any day.

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 11:43 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why?

Why can’t he make plays and protect the ball? Why does it have to be one way or the other? The truth is, until he does both, the Cowboys will get nowhere. For all the talk of Favre, the season that he actually won the Super Bowl, he had a 3:1 TD to INT ratio. We want Romo to be like Super Bowl winning Favre, not every other season/also-ran Favre.

I think that very few Cowboys fans want Romo to be cut or traded. Most that criticize him just expect him to do a little better job with his decision making and ball protection. One thing that I think is odd is how often his picks seem to go for big returns. It’s not just that he turns it over, it’s where and how he turns it over. He’s in his 6th year, he needs to start playing better, especially toward the end of the season.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 11:59 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

I agree …. but I do see Cowboy fans wanting Romo benched or traded. Not really on this site, but on others. But you’re right.

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 12:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

me too.

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 12:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes.

Someone needs to get into Romo’s head that it’s not ok to play like this. I think the biggest problem with Romo is that he’s surrounded by “yes men,” much like some of the posters on this site. Someone needs to grab him by the short and curlies and say, “Hey, stop f-ing up, play smart. You haven’t won a meaningful game yet.”

by Parl on Dec 9, 2008 12:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

"grab him by the short and curlies?"

just who do you expect to do that?

i don’t disagree that someone needs to sit him down and help him to re-think what he’s doing out there. i think the cowboys have to give him a certain amount of freedom to make a play, and that’s going to mean living with some awful plays. but he can learn to be smarter out there. he can take care of the ball better. he can learn when to take certain risks. don’t we expect that of all of the players, that they’ll continue to learn and improve? don’t see why romo should be an exception to that.

by g8tgod on Dec 9, 2008 2:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

agreed 100 percent. Until he finds a way to cut down on the turnovers we aren’t going anywhere.

2009 Draft here we come........

by Boyzfan94 on Dec 9, 2008 1:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Exactly

I don’t want him cut or traded but games like last sunday absolutely kill me and make me seriously wonder if he will ever translate those gaudy numbers into playoff wins.

by Billito on Dec 9, 2008 2:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Some I think he can correct

Some of the picks and some of the fumbles. But some are endemic to his keeping the play alive and moving in the pocket (you can’t tuck it away AND be ready to throw in a heartbeat) and the higher risk offense they play to take advantage of his best throws (deep routed to WRs, Seam routes to TEs).

Raf is genius describing his problems this game. He was spooked and cut his reads short like Drew used to.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.

by dunkman on Dec 9, 2008 5:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think most of Romo's INTs

are a result of just bad throws rather than poor decisions, therefore, those physical errors you just have to accept.

For example, the 3 INTs in Sunday’s game were just bad throws, not bad decisions or reads.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 9, 2008 8:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree 100%

Maybe this game, but his history has been picks because of bad decisions. He’s lucky he didn’t have another against Pitts, he threw one ball into the end zone to a receiver with 3 defender near him. Not even debatable.

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 9, 2008 9:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

you're wrong

I watch every Cowboys game, most are the result of just poor throws.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 8:10 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe we disagee on the definition of poor throws then

I watch them all too and this isn’t even worthy of debate. If you are defining a “poor throw” as when a receiver is blanketed, the ball gets intercepted then i’ll agree with you. He consistently throws into double and triple coverage when only a perfect throw could be completed. That’s poor judgement in my book

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 10, 2008 9:28 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If you would go back and watch

every INT Romo has ever thrown, the majority are the result of just poor throws (ball is too high, behind receiver, etc) rather than throws into double or triple coverage.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 10:25 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, this is just a plain fib

I’ve seen him try to force balls to Witten in the endzone this year that were intercepted. Witten was surrounded by at least two players.

Romo makes some amazing plays, and sometimes just makes staggeringly bad decisions. But that’s what they are: bad, sometimes horribly bad, decisions.

Even against the Steelers, Aikman mentioned how Romo was baited by Ike Taylor on the INT to Owens.

In-YOUR-endo

by accidental innuendo on Dec 10, 2008 11:38 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I never said ALL of his INTs

were the result of bad throws, I said the majority of them were, of course he makes bad reads and throws into double coverage once in a while, all qbs do.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 1:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Remembered

I think one was the Packers game.

In-YOUR-endo

by accidental innuendo on Dec 10, 2008 11:42 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

actually soup

most of Romo’s picks come early which he overcomes. The pick 6 against the Steelers was more the exception than the norm.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 9, 2008 8:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Most fans don't want to replace Romo,

They just want him to play better. Or maybe play well with more consistency, including in individual games. It’s not hating to want him to do better. He does consistently force the ball into double coverage and put the ball on the ground. While he may be into only however many games as a starter, this is his 6th year in the league. At some point, if he is truly elite, he needs to be able to make plays and protect the ball.

I think he’s one of the best in the league, but his December and January record continues to be troubling. Based on his track record, it only makes sense to have doubts about him. As soon as he actually proves everyone wrong, those doubts will go away and he will get the benefit of the doubt like the other QBs that were mentioned. I’m really hoping that it is this year, but the Pittsburgh game was not a pretty start.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 11:03 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

It's not unfair, either.

If Tashard Choice had lost 3 fumbles in that game, people would be calling for his head. But that’s not what happened. Tiki Barber had the reputation of being fumble prone until he stopped fumbling. Well, if Romo would stop turning the ball over in critical games/situations, people would stop saying it about him.

Likewise, win in December and January, and people will quit saying he can’t do it. Instead, even this game, people are trying to blame the receivers for Romo’s poor play.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 11:08 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

nobody is doing that including me

he just didn’t throw the ball well, its that simple.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 9, 2008 8:49 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

People have said that.

On this site and other Cowboys sites.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 9:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No Raf...what a terrible article...

Why would I want sucky Tony Romo when I could have a Hall-of-Fame 3 time Super Bowl winner (like Brady and Aikman)?! Stop being such a homer…

…note the bleeding sarcasm, pllllllease!

by AikmanNailedMySis on Dec 9, 2008 11:04 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

DOES ANYBODY

know the scenario for Dallas making the playoffs other than going 3-0… I heard someone explaining how Dallas can beat NYG and Philly, lose to Balt, and still make it in. I’m both at work and too lazy to do all the math myself, and didn’t know if anyone knew this off-hand? Any help?

by commoncents on Dec 9, 2008 11:06 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

So...

scenario-wise…if Dallas beats NYG and PHI, no matter what they are in?

by commoncents on Dec 9, 2008 11:14 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No.

Atlanta has to lose one more game also.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 11:15 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

IF TB beats ATL at 1PM this coming Sunday

And Dallas beats NYG Sunday Night and the Eagles the last game of the season, the boys are in regardless what they do against Baltimore.

by DieSlowKeyshawn on Dec 9, 2008 11:19 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I wrote a FanPost about it.

Simplest explanation is that if Atlanta loses one more game, and Dallas beats NYG and Philly, then Dallas is in, as they will hold tie breakers over all the other potentials. They have to beat NYG and Philly, though, as those are conference games.

They could be in with wins in any 2 of their last 3, but that would require ATL to lose to TB, and WAS, CHI, NO, and PHI to all lose at least one more game.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 11:14 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Philly worries me...

I’m fairly certain that even if we beat NYG and Baltimore, if Philly wins out — which would include defeating us — they would be in instead of us.

John 14:6

by DMorgan on Dec 9, 2008 12:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's right.

Of course, if Atlanta wins out and TB only loses to them, neither us or the Eagles would get in, unless we win out.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:20 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That

is exactly what I was looking for; thank you.

by commoncents on Dec 9, 2008 11:15 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Ask yourself this, ...

If Dallas cut Romo today, … tell me what teams would not try to sign him. That will be a very short list.

by eightball on Dec 9, 2008 11:39 AM CST reply actions   1 recs

off the top of my head ...

Saints, Giants, Patriots, Colts, Steelers, Broncos, Atlanta

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 11:44 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Also

Ravens, Dolphins, Packers, Chargers, Jaguars, Bengals, Redskins.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:03 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No way

Jaguars would take Romo over Garrard, and Redskins might sit Campbell for Romo.

John 14:6

by DMorgan on Dec 9, 2008 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I mean that to mean

No way! Jaguars WOULD take Romo……

John 14:6

by DMorgan on Dec 9, 2008 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Garrard has a huge contract.

Same as Romo’s pretty much. They’re not taking on 2 QBs with that kind of salary. Last year, Garrard was as good as Romo. Not as much this year, but he’s playing okay. It’s not his fault they are sucking this year; that team has major discipline problems. I think they have more arrests than any other team.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You must be joking

Ravens, Dolphins, Packers, Chargers, Jaguars, Bengals, Redskins – Everyone of these teams would take Romo in a second. The most ridiculous name on this list is the Dolphins.

by eightball on Dec 9, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Parcells wouldn't take him.

Parcells pretty much threw him under the bus when he left, and made it sound as if Romo was one of the reasons that he left. You think that he would sign him now? The Ravens are playing well and have a solid rookie QB that has as much upside as Romo, if not more. It’s not a question of which teams have better QBs than Romo, it’s which teams would not try to sign him. Packers, Chargers, Jaguars, Bengals, all have high dollar, high profile starters. They’re not going to go after Romo. Ravens and Redskins have good young QBs, they’re not going after Romo.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 9:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree 100%

Parcells loved Romo and would sign him in a heartbeat.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 8:12 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, I disagree with you 100%

It doesn’t matter, anyway. The point is, that if Romo was available, almost half the teams in the league would not sign him, as they have an alternative. I’m not saying that the alternative is superior to Romo, but it’s not like there are 31 teams bombarding Jerry Jones with new trade offers daily.

The whole thing is silly, since only the irrational truly want Romo cut or traded. Why does expecting him to play better always become “everyone wants him cut”? How about this? Just play better. Quit making dumb mistakes and laughing them off, quit giving the other team the ball, be elite, not just good.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 11:19 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

tough agrument

Just because a team wouldn’t sign you doesn’t mean the player isn’t a better player.. Salary caps, age, etc.. a lot of things go in to that decision.

If AP came available half of the teams in league wouldn’t sign him either and he is clearly the best RB in the league.. NO team in the NFC East would even take a look at him..

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 10, 2008 11:48 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree.

But I didn’t pose the original question. I’m not saying that all of those teams have better QBs. Most do not. But I bet that a lot of them think their guy is as good or has the same potential as Romo.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 12:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh I agree

You hear all the different grades going in to draft for players. It just shows how much teams differ on talent evaulation.. I think they said as many 6 different players were listed as the top player in the draft going in to the draft..

Case and point, Miami opted for Duante Culpepper over Drew Brees… Yikes..

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 10, 2008 6:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

he'll play better, give him time

you talk as though he’s a seasoned vet or something, he’s just a kid still.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 1:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He's 6 years in.

I don’t expect him to a grizzled vet like Favre, but he’s not still a kid either.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 3:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ravens and Dolphins?

you have to be high soup if you think Pennington and Flacco is better than Romo…thats ridiculous.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 9, 2008 8:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think as far as the Ravens go

It’s more about having just used a first rounder on a QB than that Flacco is better than Romo

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 9:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I absolutely do not think that.

It wasn’t about who has a better QB than Romo currently on their roster, it was about who wouldn’t try to sign Romo if he were available. Teams don’t just try to sign every single available free agent, except for maybe us.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 9:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The Patriots would not? Nor the Colts?

Brady needed a 2nd operation on his knee and Cassell is approaching free agency. Manning is old. Jim Sorgi is awful. They would keep his contract if they could get it. The other four, no, they would not go for him.

by Rafael Vela on Dec 9, 2008 12:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No way.

Those teams are not bringing in Romo, as it would kill all team and fan chemistry. If Brady is that bad off, they would resign Cassell. If the Cowboys released Romo tomorrow, the Colts would not sign him.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

What worries me most

Is the potential or likely absence of Holland. If he’s not in there Proctor will be living in Romo’s lap as the most overrated lineman in the game gets to pad his stats against us once again (yes Tuck has officially set the record for going for quickest ascent from underrated to overrated).

Lets not forget the injuries to Hamlin and Davis as well. This game may very well be decided before we step on the field. I

I must say though, if Holland is back for this game by some miracle I like our chances because it seems as if the Giants rush has fallen off in recent weeks. I mean did anybody see how much time McFlabb had in the pocket on Sunday?? If they give Romo that kind of time the game will get out of hand quickly.

by boysinyabelly on Dec 9, 2008 11:42 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Most of my anger is

With Jason Garret right now because I’m not seeing anything that ever surprises me. They just seem to line up in the same old formations week after week. I’d love to see 3 or 4 plays a game that have something new that the opponent hasn’t seen. I’d also like to see him roll Romo out more; as he is very good outside of the pocket.

Garrett also seems to lose the chess match against some of the better defensive coordinators in the league. I wish he had the kind of feel for play-calling that Norv used to have when he was here.

by gee-roj on Dec 9, 2008 11:50 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

+1

Is seems like he’s taken a step back with the creativeness ….. or is that just me?

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 11:53 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Sparano was in charge of the running game when he was in Dallas

I didn’t see jack squat creativity.

T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003

by APerfectStar on Dec 9, 2008 7:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

definately agree regarding the roll out

Romo is very good outside the pocket and with the weapons he has, it would be tough to defend.

by WestTxHornFan on Dec 9, 2008 4:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Excellent point, Garrett is over rated

I’ve said it many times this year. I also agree Romo should roll out more, he throws extremely well on the run and it’s a nightmare for the defense. Even a dummy like me can see it yet Garrett never calls it. After we were up 10 against Pitts, he went into total conservative mode and in my opinion cost us the game.

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 9, 2008 9:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know that anyone is calling for Romo's job.

However, many of us are pretty sick and tired of hos turn overs. Now we all know sometimes its not entirely his fault, but sometimes it is. Now I’m old school, but I like his old school attitude about having fun its cool and maybe puts that extra something in play, but opponents look at him just like we looked at Farve. Think about it didn’t you just know hat he would give us the ball at least ounce during the game? I know I did. Farves legend came as being an Iron man and a gunslinger that could, could mind you, pull off that unbelievable play or comeback ;But he was also known to put his team in a bad spot just as often. Now I think he may be playing better now that he is older and wiser.

Anyway, he is who we have. I just hope he doesn’t wait till his late 30’s to finally get it!

by bad knees on Dec 9, 2008 12:10 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I always expected to beat the Packers.

And I always expected them to lose in the big games, because I knew Favre would turn it over. He didn’t always, but more often than not.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Drew Brees has had 4 games with a QB rating below 80 this year

So has Phillip Rivers. Peyton Manning has had 5, as did his brother Eli.

Romo has had 2. That means Romo has had more good games than all those QB’s you mentioned Raf.

Lets be honest. Cowboys fans are spoiled brats who don’t realize that this is the NFL and even the best QBs will have at least a couple of bad games every year. Deal with it and move on.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 12:19 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Romo has 5 games with a rating below 80 as well

If you count the ones he didn’t play as a QB rating of 0.

How Bout Them Cowboys!

by sprprsnmn on Dec 9, 2008 12:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

So now we hold injuries against him too?

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 12:23 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No, but...

If you are going to say he has had less bad games, you have to account for the fact that he played in less games.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Rams, Bucs, Giants

I would say the Rams would be WAY above 80
Bucs = right around there, if not above
Giants = iffy

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 12:27 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Who knows?

Maybe none, maybe all 3? Maybe we smoke all of those teams, maybe he throws another pick six or long return and we lose to Tampa also.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Fine then

Romo is just as good as Brees and Rivers and better than both Mannings and Roethlesberger.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 12:38 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Saints and Chargers are worse off than the Cowboys,

Colts are in a similar spot, and Eli and Ben beat us head to head.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:41 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Records.

Saints and Chargers have worse records than the Cowboys, Colts are in the wild card hunt, and the Steelers and Giants are leading their divisions, and both of those teams beat the Cowboys. So yeah, those guys have had bad games, too, and their teams are in similar spots as the Cowboys, except the 2 teams that beat the Cowboys. Nobody is saying that Romo sucks, or even that he is not good, just that he is not elite yet.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:48 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Awful Logic

You are basically saying Drew Brees is not an elite QB and Eli Manning is? Sorry no dice.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 12:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm just using your comparisons.

If the Cowboys had come out on top of the Giants and Steelers, we aren’t having this conversation. Brees is very similar to Romo, in my opinion, because he turns the ball over at a similar rate and throws critical picks. Sometimes the timing and result of turnovers is more important than the number. If you turn it over inside of either 20 or for a pick six, that is a killer.

Super Bowl MVP Eli, whose team is 11-2 and won the Cowboys’ division is not elite?

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Believe it or not there is 52 other players on a team

Larry Brown was not an elite CB despite being superbowl MVP, and Trent Dilfer was not an elite QB despite winning a superbowl.

If you think Eli Manning is a better QB than Romo and Brees, then I’m probably wasting my time arguing with you.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 1:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Are we talking potential or reality?

As TO says, the proof is in the pudding. I think Romo can be way better than Eli, but he has to cut down on poor decision making and turnovers. Romo has 1 game this year where he did not have a turnover, against the Browns. Brees has 4 and Eli has 7. Call him a bus driver or whatever, but sometimes it is more important to protect the ball and the lead, or just move the chains, than to go for it all and risk the game.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I want to see what Eli does this postseason.

The book is still being written on him.

As for Eli last year, it was a tale of two seasons; regular and postseason. He might have been a huge reason the Giants won the Super Bowl but he was a huge hindrance in them even making the playoffs. If you want proof, look at his awful back-to-back performances in Week 15 and 16 of last season. The Giants D and running game got them in the playoffs last year; Eli manned up while he was there.

by MadMick on Dec 9, 2008 1:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Another cowboy fan who thinks if you wear the star, you're all world, if you dont, you're just over-rated

Larry Brown had two gifts given to him by Neil O’donnell, two key turnovers that cost the Steelers that superbowl,.Do you get it now, turnovers in key spots in key games cost you wins. You just made the case for us that have been stating Romo has to play better, make better decisions and protect the ball an not to force it into double coverage..
 Eli Manning protected the ball, didn’t force the play, and didn’t turn it over in key situations in key games. The Turnover ratio down the stretch and in the playoffs are a big deal, whether you think it is or not… Teams that lose the turnover ratio in key games and playoff games, find themselves outside looking in….

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 1:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wow.

I never considered that the Larry Brown thing was actually a great argument about why Romo needs to play better. Good insight.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Deke he was lucky that asante did not catch that ball

in the SB, he has a history of being TO prone. It was luck that the game did not end right then and there. And do not forget the fumbles he got back in that game that the pats did not recover, I remember at least two of them that he did not lose.

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Dec 9, 2008 1:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No I'm just a Cowboy fan who doesn't buy into the media B.S. like you did Deke

Peyton Manning had an td/int ratio of 3/7 in the post-season when he got his Superbowl.

Moreover, Romo has a td/int ratio of 2/1 in postseason games, and no fumbles. Give me a break.

You like the media put Romo under a microscope and overblow every bad game and every turnover. Get real.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 1:26 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No fumbles?

Doesn’t the fumbled snap for the FG count? It did cost us the game.

by Philosopher on Dec 9, 2008 1:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I am not sure that is considered a fumble

probable termed as a missed FG, it could be a technicallity.

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Dec 9, 2008 1:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think you need to check your stats

In the four post season games, Eli Manning on the road at Tampa,Dallas,Green bay and the SUperbowl had a total of 6 TD’s an 1 INT.

Direct correlation between turnovers and winning games

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 1:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He said Peyton

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 1:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

He turns it over every game via INT or a fumble, or both

and has countless others that are almost picked off because of poor decisions and poor throws,The last time he didn’t have a turnover was the game against Detroit last year, but hey, lets all over look that

39 games—44int’s 27 fumbles-10 lost—telling numbers indeed

is it too much to askof Romo to better protect the ball and make better decisions with the ball, for you, I guess it is…

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Apparently you don't watch the games Deke

Because Romo doesn’t turn the ball over in the playoffs. After all isn’t that what we are talking about. That blows a big hole in your non-existent argument.

Moreover, Romo has a TD/INT ratio of 1.79, and the great Eli has one of [drum roll] 1.35. Deke stop dishing out conventional wisdom and check your facts.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 2:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

wh dont you look up Aikmans TD/INT ratio for the first three years

Romo had a chaance to learn on the sideline for three years, Eli thrown into the fire first season, WOW, I wonder why one guy end ratio is better..

I guess Aikmans Td/int ratio for his first three years would classify him as a bust with the way you use that TD/INT ratio..

I’m talking playoffs, turining the ball over, poor decisions, and losing the turnover battle will cost you games and you give me season ratio, you are all over the place…

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 3:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Again Deke what playoff game are

you referring to where Romo had a turnover problem?

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 3:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I talking playoff games in general, period, not ROMO past play in the playoff which by the way, hasn't been that great

turn the ball over like Sunday four times in the playoffs, you lose, forcing balls into double coverage, poor throws, poor decision in playoff games, you lose.

He’s turned the ball over in nine straight games, time to knock off the poor play and turnovers every game. Can overcome those against weaker teams in the regular season, cant against good teams in the playoff if you turn the ball over.

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 3:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

But you are saying his turnover problems

are the reasons we haven’t advanced in the playoffs. You said to paraphrase “well Eli was able to win playoff games but Romo wasn’t” Then I ask you for a reason, then you say he turns the football over too much. And obviously that is not the reason why Eli advanced and not Romo, because Romo didn’t turnover the ball.

So why did you put the blame at Romo’s feet for us not winning playoff games?

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 3:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's not what I said, I never said Romo was the fault in either of those playoff loses

If Romo doesn’t start taking better care of the ball going forward, he’s not going to win in the playoffs, heck, he might not even get there this year if he turns the ball over several times a game against these good teams coming up.

Turnovers cost you games, period, whether by a quarterback, int of via a fumble by other players on the team, but the Qb is the only one that starts every play on offense with the ball in his hands..

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 3:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok great so we can agree that since

we both agree that the playoff losses weren’t Romo’s fault, and the fact that Eli advanced and Romo didn’t shouldn’t make Eli a better QB, right?

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 3:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Romo certainly has more ability than Eli

that there is no doubt, but in the minds of the media, championships is what they rate Qbs by in the end, right now Eli has one, Romo has none, that alone in alot of peoples mind and mine, makes Eli the better QB fright now. Eli Manning at this point, because he has a championship and is making fewer mistakes, is the better QB, can that change, absolutely. All I’m asking for is for Romo to cut down the mistakes, protect the ball, limit the turnovers, make better decisions and clean up his game, that’s what will make him a great Qb and a superbowl winning QB, but right now, he’s still a work in progress, Where ELi is a more end finished product, that’s just my opinion.

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 3:56 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

but why should him having a ring make him a better

QB if we didn’t advance to no fault of Romo? I’m not getting your logic.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Eli Manning

lead his team on the road in the playoffs to wins in tampa, Dallas, Green bay in wintery conditions and beat the undefeated Patriots in a game where the giants were the underdogs. Any way you look at it, that’s impressive, four games against bigtime teams and had 1 INT in those four games. Thats why he’s the better QB at this point, he’s got skins on the wall, those are some impressive skins. Since the first game last year when they lost in dallas, the giants have lost one road game since up to this point, that loss coming against Cleveland. The Giants road record, regular season and playoffs is 16-1. That vaults Eli ahead of Romo at this point

This year he has continued to play outstanding football, Eli has lead the Giants to a 11-2 record, division winners, he may not be flashy, but he’s solid and protects the football.. 20 td’s 8 int’s 61 completion %

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 4:24 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I thought you said the defense won the superbowl and Not Eli?

Why did you turn around and say that Eli did it? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

Romo’s stat line by the way is 22 td’s 11 ints and 63% completion.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 4:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Eli did as in part of the team, as the leader, the QB that won a championship

The defense was a huge part in how they won the superbowl, but Eli was the leader, the Qb of the offense that lead the team down the field for the winning score

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 4:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

"lead" that is a nice squishy word

So I guess we finally fleshed out the crux of your argument then.

Could you please define “lead” and explain why Eli is a better leader than Romo and how that aided him in advancing into the playoffs and since Romo is a worse leader how that led us not advancing. And please do not use conclusory statements.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 4:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

And what was the turnover ratio, you didn't mention the turnovers by the oposition ??

KC 2 ints, Ravens 2 ints, NE 1int, Bears, 2 INT

there’s seven turnovers via INT, the ratio for Peyton is even for the combined game through int’s and that doesn’t take into account fumbles in those games which believe Indy won that ratio, hence turnover ratio favors a team that wins in the playoffs

Why did the cowboy beat the Bills in the superbowl, did the key turnovers by the bills have anything to do with it, it sure did, especially the second time round in Atanta, Dallas trailed going into the second half, but a key fumble caused by Lett enabled Washington to run it back and changed the game in dallas favor, then in the fourth Quarter, Washington picked off another ball setting up an Emmitt touchdown that sealed the game. Turnovers in the playoffs kill you, losing the turnover raito kills you.

But never critigue the chosen one, the jedi master, or you’ll be labelled a hater here by some. If the media dare critigue the Jedi Master, they’re morons, idiots or poor excuses for columnists.Just laughable!!!

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 2:46 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh I critique Romo, he played a horrid game

but stop acting like his supposed “turnover” problem is a problem. Because he doesn’t turn it over in the playoff. And despite this supposed turnover problem during the regular season, he has a fantastic regular season record.

I don’t buy this argument that his turnover problems are the reason we can’t move foward in the playoffs, because there is absolutely no evidence to support that argument.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Eli is only as good as his running game and the defense....

More times that not, like this past Sunday if you let Eli try to win a game by passing he stinks it up. Allow him to do too much and the end result is a loss alot of those times.

2009 Draft here we come........

by Boyzfan94 on Dec 9, 2008 1:12 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Is that not true of most quarterbacks?

Romo had a QB rating over 90 in 2 of the 3 games the Cowboys lost with him starting, and won against Washington when he was below 80, due to running game and defense. The game was in his hands in Pittsburgh, and resulted in a pick six to seal it. Obviously a QB can’t win or lose games by themselves, although they do typically have a larger effect on the outcome than any other player.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:16 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The Giant receivers dropped ateast five passes in that game

Eli wasn’t the problem. Hixon dropped a sure touchdown on the first offensive play, that’s not on Eli.
manning isn’t a spare and right now he has a ring, an superbowl MVP and three bigtime road wins and a superbowl against top tier teams, that alone makes him better than Romo thus far, as of now….but things can change

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 1:22 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The front 7 was the Superbowl MVP

anyone who watched the game knows that. The Giants front 7 made Tom Brady look bad, and that was an impossible thing to do that year.

Putting 17 points on the board is not an MVP worthy performance. But apparently it is if your last name is Manning

Eli is about as good as Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Phil Simms. Not an elite QB. Just good enough to let their defense win the game.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 1:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Manning wasn't the reason that drive was kept alive

because David Tyree made a fantastic catch on a badly overthrown ball.

Moreover, even for the sake of argument even if that drive was successful because of Eli, The Giants defense played an outstanding game from beginning to end. Tom Brady could have very well put together a game winning drive at the end, but the Giants defense prevented that. No easy thing to do when you are Playing against Tom Brady and Randy Moss.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 1:44 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

playing well for a couple of minutes as

oppose to a whole game are two very different things.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

four straight wins on the road

4 wins, 6 td’s, 1 int and again you want to diminish his accomplishments …

Did Eli cost the Giants the win—no . Did he get out of a sack and make a throw for tyree to catch—yes, did he throw the TD pass in the final minute to win the game against the favorite, who didn’t lose a game all season-yes. That’s your MVP…easy call

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 2:05 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

17 points against the patriots that year

would never win you the game; regardless if you threw that TD in the first minute of the game or the last minute of the game. You would have lost. Maybe it means more because you’re a softy Deke and it makes for a better storyline to have that TD at the end of the game, but in reality throwing that TD in the first few minutes as oppose to the last few wouldn’t change the outcome of the game.

The reason why they won is because the defense held the best offense ever assembled to 13 points. They didn’t win because of Eli, they won because the defense did the impossible. And that is a fact. Justin Tuck deserved the MVP for sure, but was robbed because their QB’s last name was Manning.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 2:42 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The media picked the MVP, not me

I just understand why they chose him, I agree the defense was the story of the game, but in the media’s mind, again, they made the decision, not me, Manning was the MVP becasue of the last minute drive, I may not agree with it, but I understood the pick, even if I disagree with it too, but I just get it

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 2:51 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If I believe that was the case, I would of said I

Since I didn’t, you shouldn’t jump to that conclusion, that’s why I said easy call, not easy call for me!!!

I gave you the reason why he was picked because of the circumstances surrounding what was happening in the game..

If I had the choice,Ii would of picked Tuck, put with the last drive, winning score,lead by a QB, it was an easy call…..just not my call

by Deke on Dec 9, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Preach quincyyyyy

I was just talking with a friend the other day (ironically just before the Pitt game) about how overblown Romo’s “bad” games in regards to their frequency. It was actually in reference to a PTI over/under segment where they debated as to Romo’s Qb rating being over or under 50. Regardless of how prophetic it might have been in light of the game do you know he’s only had 3 games under a 50 Qb rating his entire career? Buffalo and 2 Philly games.

With a guy who gets so much heat from media and fans about his potential to “throw away” the game and what-not you would think he’d average about 5 of those games a yr.

by boysinyabelly on Dec 9, 2008 12:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

How Bout Them Cowboys!

by sprprsnmn on Dec 9, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that's

the problem … you watched PTI …. that show is complete garbage!

It's called Sex Panther by Odeon. It's illegal in nine countries... Yep, it's made with bits of real panther, so you know it's good.

by what_the_crap on Dec 9, 2008 12:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm as much of a Romo homer as Terry

Well, maybe not quite that much, but I’m just saying that the comparison isn’t fair. Granted quincyyyyy’s point that if Romo had played in those, he would have been over 80 in them is probably true, but he didn’t.

To make the comparison fair, you’ll have to take away 25% from each of the other’s totals. That still leaves Romo looking pretty good.

How Bout Them Cowboys!

by sprprsnmn on Dec 9, 2008 12:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No doubt, Romo stunk it up...

…I still like the guy, as a player and as a man. He manned up, took responsibility for leaving dog-doo all over the field and made no excuses. He wouldn’t even take an excuse when Witten handed him one.

To be a successful NFL QB you have to have the physical skills, as well as the emotional and mental strengths. Romo showed me that he has what it takes.

Along that line, I’m not making excuses either, but did it appear to any one else that part of Romo’s problem seemd mechanical or physical? I mean, he sailed more than one pass high, several actually, which made me think his grip is still bothering him.

"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams

by Jim Vance on Dec 9, 2008 12:27 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Cold weather...

…I’m sure exacerbated the injury to his hand.

by danielt on Dec 9, 2008 12:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Garrett.. gets way to conservative...with a lead..

he allows other teams to get back in the game…i understand controlling the clock w/running…but only if its effective…once choice became tired and he did into the third, then i think you need your stars to step up and get some 1st…because going 3 and out, however many times we did there in the second half, let their defence rest and ours became tired. it was the other way up to about halfway through the 3rd Q…then no rest for our d…..bad offencive play calling..we took our foot of there throats…sorry for the long one…

I don't need a compass to know which way the wind shines....

by hashishkabob on Dec 9, 2008 12:31 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Reminded me of that Awful game against WAS

When Parcells tried to sit on a 13 point lead and we lost the game in the final few minutes.

How Bout Them Cowboys!

by sprprsnmn on Dec 9, 2008 12:33 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Wade does the same thing with the Defense.

Every single game, you know the other team is going to make a late run because the Cowboys will be playing prevent offense and defense.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 12:34 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

It also reminded me of another game.

That game being the 1993 regular season finale against the Giants for the NFC East Title which the Cowboys had to win in overtime………16-13. Now, in terms of sheer dominance that Giants defense might not have been in the same category as this Steelers unit but they did finish 1st in points allowed (205.) Also, the Giants had clearly seized the momentum by the time that game reached overtime as I believe a Kevin Williams muffed punt set up the Giants to score the game-tying touchdown. All was not well.

We all know about Emmitt’s Herculean effort. So what was Aikman’s line for the game? An unspectacular 24-of-30 for 180 yards and a TD. I guess the point I want to make is that at some point every team has to win a 16-13 slugout to get where they want to be and as much as I love Romo’s moxy, I’m not sure how well he grasps that concept. His last interception was unforgivable and I had the sickest feeling that something like that was going to happen. I’m convinced that the reason they called a Choice draw on 3rd-and-7 the previous possession is that the coaches didn’t trust Romo much by that point either and the last thing they wanted was the game in his hands.

That being said, I did think he was due for a stinker and if it was going to happen it’s certainly better that it happened in Pittsburgh instead of Philly. The best and worst news is that we’ll find out the rest of the way what Romo is made of as there are no daisies left on the schedule.

Also, that Sunshine Superman label Pro Football Outsiders labeled him with is somehow far more cutting than any of the vulgar things you could call Romo.

by MadMick on Dec 9, 2008 1:00 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

24 of 30 is pretty good.

Sometimes it’s about moving the chains instead of going for all or nothing. I don’t think that’s a good thing if your coaching staff doesn’t want the ball in your best player’s hands, especially when the result was that it ended up there anyway.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree.

However there will be some that consider that unspectacular a line way too unsexy. I would point out to them though that Aikman’s yards per attempt was something in the neighborhood of 8.7 in the playoffs from ‘92-’95 so it’s not like that unsexy 24-of-30 was anything near the norm for him during the playoffs.

by MadMick on Dec 9, 2008 1:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Just to be clear.

What I meant to emphasize was the 180 yards (on 24-of-30) passing and that some ignoramuses would just scoff at that line and say “oh, look, he dinked and dunked.”

by MadMick on Dec 9, 2008 1:31 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm done with Garrett

It’s amazing after last season everyone would’ve jumped off bridges if we lost him. Now, people are standing in line to push him off. Garrett is overrated like some of the players on this team…

2009 Draft here we come........

by Boyzfan94 on Dec 9, 2008 1:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Tex Called Romo, "The Best QB Never to Win a Playoff Game"

Tex has to jump into to fray here, after Buckner kicked another ground ball. The problem with Romo has nothing to do with his skill level, it is his “SAC” or lack there of. Romo didn’t want to be out there in the cold, that was obvious. He showed the same look in the Washington DC rain last year. Now, did he intentionally throw that game away to get inside, probably not, but that’s the perception with this kid.

As Tex has been clamoring for years, the Cowboys need to spend a relatively high draft pick on a QB to keep Romo from wandering off, see Kevin Kolb in Phily. Perfect example.

Bottom line… Romo lacks the heart of a champion. He doesn’t fare well under pressure – his hands shake so hard he can’t hold a snap. He’s a Country Club QB, and that will probably never change. The Cowboys can win in spite of #9, but until proven otherwise, he’s John Van de Velde at the 18th tee with a three stroke lead.

by Montecito Tex on Dec 9, 2008 12:52 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Welcome back Tex

I was worried that you were injured in the fire.

"He has a peculiar felicity of expression." John Adams

by Jim Vance on Dec 9, 2008 12:55 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The Romo Defenders will be along shortly.

But I think you’re right and it’s what I’ve been saying for a while now. Romo is not a champion. He’s eaten the cheese and he needs someone to get in his face and call him out for these stupid turnovers.

by Parl on Dec 9, 2008 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Now you know this is a big issue

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 1:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Is TO the Problem, not Romo?

I really encourage everyone to check out this post over at DCFanatic.com on Tony’s relationship with his WRs, and particularly the second clip, the audio with Brad Sham and Larry Brown. There’s a candid segment in the middle while they are talking off-air during the commercial, and they are very critical of TO, saying that while he’s a superb athlete he is not good at playing the position of WR. Basically, he quits on his routes when he doesn’t think the ball is coming to him, and doesn’t fight for the ball when it does, so Romo does not trust him. The first pick Romo threw was TO’s fault for quitting on the route.

I have been a TO defender, but I think I agree with them. Someone needs to get over the celebrity, high-paid status of TO and sit him down the give him a serious talking to. He needs to get his s**t together, put full effort into every play, complete every route, and fight for every ball, or he has not reason whatsoever to complain when Tony doesn’t get him the ball.

by scottmaui on Dec 9, 2008 12:59 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I don't agree with that entirely

I respect Sham and Brown’s opinion, but no matter how bad of a day TO’s having he never seems to stop giving his all on the field. That int was Romo’s fault for short arming the throw. Really, I don’t even think its physically possible to quit on a route if you’re running up the field and the ball is underthrown is it? The lone TD pass was a direct result of TO not quitting on the play and Romo’s confidence in him to get open when things break down.

I’ll agree that TO might not be the most technically sound wr in the game, but I have to think this criticism comes from people’s dislike for his on field demeanor and stupid things he might say to the press every now an again.

by boysinyabelly on Dec 9, 2008 1:43 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

true

A missed piece on Romo’s last int is the guy running free in his face. Since Romo hurt his hand he has to step in to every throw to keep it accurate. They say when a ball sails on the QB it is do mechanics. Romo short armed the 2nd Int and didn’t step in to the witten pick. Not sure if has the strength in hand( due to injury and cold) to just flip the ball out there..

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 9, 2008 2:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Is TO holding Garrett, the Offense hostage?

It’s very clear, there’s a ’we’ve got to get TO his touches’ approach to our Gameplanning. And he absolutely quits on routes when he doesn’t feel the ball is coming his way – 1st INT should have been an incompletion at worst.

At the same time, you can’t deny his production and value. The challenge is to get him his touches when they are make sense, but we have forced it. I did learn a new phrase, ‘celebrity WR.’

'You can recognize true genius by this: all the dunces are in confederacy against you' - Sir Francis Bacon

by tdships on Dec 10, 2008 10:11 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree, but...

It sounds to me like you’re saying that because the rest of the leagues so-called “top” QB’s are hot garbage that we should excuse Romo’s decisions that kill us in these tight games? When you’re up 10 with 8 minutes to go in the 4th, you should not lose. This one is squarely on Garrett, Romo, Witten – as far as mistakes and a bad game go. I’ll throw T.O. under the bus for pouting entirely too much, too.

But here’s my thing on Romo (and I love the guy). The other Cowboy QB who held passing records and won a ton of games – but never did anything significant in the post season was Danny White. Danny White went to 3 NFC Championship games and lost all 3. I don’t even think he’s in the ring of honor at Texas Stadium (correct me if I’m wrong). Romo gets paid a lot of money and as a fan I expect him to play with consistency. What is it about December that rattles this guy? He’s got to show us something against NY. This is money time. I know he knows that, but he needs to show it on the field.

by GodsTeam on Dec 9, 2008 1:16 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

The bottom line is

that romo will be tested in the next three games, and if he performs like he did against pittsburg over the next three weeks it will prove that he may not be up to the challenge of the crucial games that have to be won. I believe he will play much better than he did in his last game but I will hold my judgement of him until after the games have been played. If the def plays like they did last week, then that gives the team with a good romo the best shot they have to build some momentum into the playoffs.

I also like what Nate said in Mon talking cowboys segment, he said that when he was watching romo’s post game interv that “he was feeling what romo was saying, like I have to be better than this and that he realizes that he cannot continue to be this way”. I hope nate is right, I feel that this game was one that clearly he could see that without a doubt he hurt their chances of obtaining a win. I think that he feels he was a significant factor in this loss and hopefully he realizes that he can trust the def to be there to where he does not have to put up 300 yd games every week to win games. I also agree with what Larry Brown and Nate said about the team in general, they need to have a better awareness of how turnovers hurt you, I feel the way they do in that the team seems to just shrug off the turnovers like it is not a big deal; they need to make the most of this experience to learn what it takes to beat a real playoff team and that will help them in the coming weeks and into the playoffs if they can close the deal.

Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!

by cowboy78 on Dec 9, 2008 1:22 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Also well said.

I think this one clearly cannot be laid at the feet of the defense or running game, as some have been in the past. This one was a direct result of too many turnovers, and unlike the Buffalo game, we didn’t pull it out in the end. Earlier this year, Romo shrugged off turning the ball over, and said something like, “You have to turn the ball over to make big plays.” That was actually the point where he kind of lost me a little as a believer. Coming back from the injury, though, he seemed to have turn the corner until this game. Hopefully, he does now understand the impact of those turnovers and that will help him take the next step.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I can definitely get behind what you're saying here

In the past, I was much more willing to forgive the “bad games” because our defense was wildly inconsistent, and we had half of a working running game (it was usually a bad sign when Julius was in), so it made sense that Romo felt like he had to win games for us, and sometimes that meant forcing the play. Now that our D is really playing up to its potential and we have a stable of quality runners, I think what it comes down to is that Romo just needs to recognize when he needs to put the team on his back, and when he just needs to take the short, high percentage plays to lessen the likelihood of turnovers. He had to be “the man” a lot last season, and I think he just needs to shake that mentality a bit. But you can paint me a Romosexual, I love the dude.

"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers every time." -Max McGee

by BigDinSC on Dec 9, 2008 1:47 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Raf

You are dead on, Romo is an top end QB, but he needs take his game to the next level this December..

John Madden said it perfect on Sunday Night. Dallas as a tough schedule, but if we can’t be those teams to get in then we don’t belong in the playoffs.

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 9, 2008 1:46 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I get the frustration

And it pisses me off too when he throws stupid and avoidable INT’s. But if we ever traded Romo away, it would be a very, very sad day for me. There truly isn’t another QB I’d take over Romo and that include the Brady, P. Manning, and Brees, or anyone else you can name. Romo is the ONLY reason we are doing as well as we have been over the past couple of years. He has single-handedly turned this franchise into a team worth watching every weekend, again. He makes mistakes people, but he’s young and has only a couple true NFL years under his belt. He came from a weak college with weak talent. Give it time. Stick with him, through the good and the bad and I promise you, when he finally puts it all together, you’ll thank your lucky stars we kept him.

by sublimezg on Dec 9, 2008 2:00 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Tony Romo is the ONLY QB I want right now to lead Our Beloved Boyz

However, I just wish he made better decisions — especially in crucial situations and especially after November.

For all the Romo haters out there, remember 5-11, 5-11, 5-11… followed by the likes of Quincy Carter, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe, and more recently Brad Johnson at quarterback.

Just my humble opinion…

"I got a fever. And the only prescription is more cowbell." -- Bruce Dickinson

www.brainfriednetwork.com [NEWS/SPORTS/FOOTBALL]

by silverblue5 on Dec 9, 2008 2:04 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Well said SB

I don’t get all the arguments.

Romo is good, but he’s not perfect. Good luck finding a QB who is.

In his 1st playoff game, he mishandles a hold on a FG attempt with a wet ball (and for those who say that didn’t matter, then explain why the league changed the rules after the season regarding K-balls) and the Boys lose to SEA. Then he guides his team to a 13-3 record in his 2nd season (1st full) and top seed in the playoffs. Half the team makes mistakes, except for Romo and Dallas loses to the Midgets. Suddenly Romo can’t win the big games.

Give me a break. Some people need to stop being brainwashed by the MSM.

T-New, shutting down WR's for Dallas since 2003

by APerfectStar on Dec 9, 2008 7:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Speak da Truth, Brutha Tom!!!

"I got a fever. And the only prescription is more cowbell." -- Bruce Dickinson

www.brainfriednetwork.com [NEWS/SPORTS/FOOTBALL]

by silverblue5 on Dec 10, 2008 6:24 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You guys are all crazy! Whining doesn't = winning! Not that I don't ever do it

I’m one for getting upset at players, coaches, etc, etc. One thing I do is really try to look at things objectively. Every QB/player has bad games. That is just how it is. Especially when there are so many injuries on this team. Not even close to last year in that department which reflects our current record. Everyone might be saying how great he is next week. That’s just the way it is in this league from fans. Play well and win one week and they are great, give up the ball 4 times and lose and they suck. Romo still has more to learn. A lot of these players still have a lot to learn. Let them learn.

As hard as it is to watch them learn and lose doing it, this team will improve and make less mistakes. I really don’t think they will make the playoffs, or be healthy enough to make the run. They are too beat up. I will be hoping though. Romo can do it, you’ve all seen him do it. One game at a time.

by torchindefenses on Dec 9, 2008 2:48 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I get a feeling

that Tony Romo hears what we’re saying here, he knows, he said so. I’m just afraid that it doesn’t mess around his head and he overcompensates and “thinks” too much. We will then bitch about him getting sacked. Although I must say that the Giants D line looked pretty cheesy last Sunday. As in Swiss. The Eagles ran all over them. What’s up with that?

by dcfansinceiwasababy on Dec 9, 2008 3:05 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Does anyone here remember what Bill Parcells used to say to Romo??

He used to say if he learned how to manage the game better and not force the ball too much that he could be a pretty good player in this league. Be patient and make your reads.

The live by Romo, die by Romo has got me thinking. A gunslinger ALWAYS loses in the end. It’s what makes Romo tick. If only he could tame it a bit and break it out when he needs too.

by torchindefenses on Dec 9, 2008 3:12 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I just want to shove a football down his mouth. Could you believe how he walked off the field grinning while Holland was lying face down?

by ym on Dec 9, 2008 4:18 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Bottom line is if not for Romo

this team would have been a .500 non playoff team at best the last two years….’nuff said.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 9, 2008 8:59 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Or they would have acquired a quarterback.

I don’t see that happening with all of this talent and with Jerry so intent on winning. I think Romo is a huge part of their success, but he’s not out there with a bunch of scrubs.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 9, 2008 9:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah I don't think so

Without Romo what is Jerry going to do? Call 1-800-Quarterback. It doesn’t work like that Soup.

by quincyyyyy on Dec 9, 2008 9:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Or Flacco, Or Ryan, Or Brees?

Or Kerry Collins, or anyone? Obviously they didn’t continue looking for a QB because they had Romo, but if not, they would have found one.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 11:07 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

wouldn't take any of them over Romo

Brees 7 years as a starter, 1 playoff win, I wouldn’t call that proven.. Romo has been a starter for 3 years with 2 oppurtunites to lead a team to the playoffs, and has don’t both times.. How does he not get credit for that..

The rest of them haven’t proven they can even lead a team to the playoffs.

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 10, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I didn't say I want any of those guys over Romo.

I’m just saying that if they hadn’t found Romo, they wouldn’t have just gone without a QB for 3 years. Jerry would have found someone, and there were other decent options available. Like say that Romo wasn’t any good, you don’t think Jerry would have tried to draft one of the other young QBs out there?

Kerry Collins went to a Super Bowl, didn’t he?

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 12:02 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

That's not being very objective.

You’d have to be crazy to think Brees wouldn’t put up numbers just as good as Romo in this offense. He put up some damn good numbers missing Colston and without the benefit of a running game for a stretch early this season. Now would having Brees back there have prevented Crayton from playing like a punk in the playoffs last year? Probably not.

by MadMick on Dec 10, 2008 3:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

doesn't mean the qb they acquired

would have had any success or the success Romo has had. How ’bout Quincy Carter, Chad Hutchinson, Drew Henson, Vinny Testaverde, Ryan Leaf and Drew Bledsoe.

These were the qbs the Cowboys acquired after Aikman and before Romo…that should tell you what I’m talking about.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 1:50 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Didn't Quincy get them into the playoffs?

I think they went 10-6 and a first round loss, right? Isn’t that what they did with Romo the last 2 years?

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 3:32 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that season was an aberration

that team also played great defense, unlike what we’ve had the majority of the time Romo has played.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 7:45 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

A lot of great comments and analysis (and some stupidity for variety)

Here’s another take -- Tony Romo needs to hit the weights. He fumbles almost every time he is tackled from behind. A lot of his fumbles are recovered by the Cowboys but I’ve been amazed how often this happens. It isn’t usually a matter of someone swatting the ball out of his hands either. One of his fumbles Sun he actually had it pretty well tucked and it still squirted out.

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 9, 2008 10:02 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

I'm pretty sure Romo lifts weights

that has nothing to do with his fumbles.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 8:15 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh really?

Of course he lifts some, my point (I’ll spell it out more clearly so everyone gets it) is he needs to do more. What do you attribute the amount of times he fumbles when the ball is tucked?

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 10, 2008 9:24 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

why do you think lifting more weights

would make him hold on to the ball better, that makes no sense to me.

Maybe he has smaller hands, and if thats the case, I don’t care how strong someone is, the ball is going to get knocked out easier.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Whatever his problem is,

He needs to do a better job holding onto the ball.

by Baked Potato Soup on Dec 10, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If his hands are small

there might be nothing that can be done. I don’t care about his fumbles as much as I do his INTs as they happen far less frequently.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on Dec 10, 2008 1:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I think it has to do with hand size, personally

He has small hands, so he will not have as firm of grip as some of the larger QB’s. Not an excuse just a fact.

"If you see me up in the mountains with a lion, I ain't lyin
don't help me, help the mountain lion"

by Wmillion on Dec 10, 2008 11:53 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to say, you ask the hmmmmm.......

most naive questions. Why would lifting weights help? Let’s see. A very big, very strong defender grabs you from behind. You have a ball in your hands he is trying to strip from you and you would prefer to not fumble. The only thing between him stripping it from you and your ability to hold onto it is……..let’s take a wild guess, the amount of strength you have in your upper body. Does that help?

by StillHateTheGiants on Dec 17, 2008 12:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Dallas Cowboys blog for the SB Nation network. We talk Cowboys 24/7/365. Join the discussion but follow the community guidelines.
Start posting about the Cowboys »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Captain_small
Seven Statistical Nuggets As December Looms
Mom_s_camera_081_small
A Special 'Thank You' to Grizz.
Small
Garrett DOES Have a Running Problem
Images_small
Playoff Chances: Week 10
Captain_small
NFL Power Rankings - Week 11 - Final Edition

Recent FanPosts

Darren_woodson-the_real_hammer_2_small
When are we going to see Tashard again Garrett?
Small
ROY WILLIAMS??? GET HIM OFF MY TEAMYESNo
Lil-00007305-sm_small
Cowboys Wide Receivers still having issues getting open
Barberbench_small
Someone who gets a pass and someone who doesn't (poll)
Villaronga_small
Theismann, head, hole in the ground ...
Small
Cowboys and Redskins at Dallas - A Look Back
Fox-jimmyjohnson_20_3
Are the Redskins the key to the division..?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

SPONSORS


Editor

Head_shot1_small Dave Halprin

Lead Writer

Small Rafael Vela

Contributing Writers

Villaronga_small Raul Villaronga

Hotdoglu_small Aaron Novinger

Landry_and_fish_small Mike Fisher