How bad was Tony Romo's December play?
by quincyyyyy on Mar 16, 2009 11:58 AM CDT
Email
PrintThere is a lot of talk about how poorly Romo played in December. His QB rating was a hair over 70. Obviously not good. But when put into it's proper context it is not bad either.
Let's look at the 4 defenses he played in December: Pittsburgh, Giants, Ravens, Eagles. Their respective ranking in terms passer rating was 2, 8,1, and 5. All in the top ten and 3 in the top 5. The average passer rating for all four teams was... 68.4. (Not even taking into account the throwing conditions in Pittsburgh in December)
Now I'm not trying to say Romo played perfectly. He most definitely didn't. Nor am I saying he doesn't need to improve. He does. But when the media acts like Romo carries around some December curse, lets just try to keep it all in perspective and put things in their proper context.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
179 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well said
Also, everyone knocks Romo for all of his TOs in December, which was 9 and did lead the league for qbs in that month, however, Roethlisberger also had 7 TOs, but since he plays on a team with an all world defense which bails him and overcomes his TOs, he gets tabbed a clutch qb, which is a joke.
If Romo had an all world defense, I’m pretty sure nobody would be talking about his TOs either because the Cowboys would be winning games in December and January.
In Romo we Trust
if romo was playing with a healthy offense
the cowboys would be winning games in december and january
by CowboysFan4Life on Mar 16, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions
If the offensive line
was not doing a reinactment of The Replacements line where the ole’d every freakin rusher, we would have been playing in February
difference being Romo's TO were mostly of the pick 6, or returned deep into Dallas territory....No defense can help those kind of TO's.
by CowboysRnumba1 on Mar 21, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions
pitts and balt.....rewind and watch..
by CowboysRnumba1 on Mar 21, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions
heck...throw the philly tape in too..
by CowboysRnumba1 on Mar 21, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions
+1.......
and if you do always depend on your “all world defense” to bail you out, sooner or later, it will catch up to you. You might be able to squeak out a few wins, but sooner or later, your luck will run out. That’s the biggest difference between 07 and 08. We were very lucky in some games and so we expected the same in 08. It didn’t happen did it. When you have your HC (Wade) saying at the end of the season that his QB needs to cut down on the turn-overs, that’s saying something because as we all know, Wade never says anything publicly about his players.
and it doesn't matter if the turn-overs are in the first quarter or end of the game....
like some seem to think. All turn-overs are bad because they either kill a drive or lead to points for the opposing team.
TO ratio is one of the biggest factors between winning and losing....
I believe we were minus 11 NOT good.
Super Bowl teams
Pitts – +6
Ariz – +8
by CowboysRnumba1 on Mar 21, 2009 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions
so you think turnovers are okay at the beginning of the game?
So three turnovers are okay as long as they are at the beginning of the game? Sorry, I don’t follow that logic if it leads to 21 unanswered points where you have to get out of your gameplan to play catch-up? Explain that to me how that’s acceptable.
I never once said they're okay
again your puttin words in my mouth as usual. TOs are never good, but if they’re going to happen, its better they happen early than late because you have much more time to overcome them..its not rocket science.
In Romo we Trust
Yes and yes.
It’s probably the hottest picture of all-time — at least the hottest of which would be acceptable on this site.
Damn
I thought that was a pic of you.
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 16, 2009 10:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Kudos for that pic
I think I read that she’s saving herself for marriage. That’s going to be one lucky dude.
Actually she eloped with some obscure basketball player Darko Jarvic or something
and they have now been married about 2 weeks now.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
Donnie Darko?
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 19, 2009 12:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Wow...crazy.
She’s off the table, boys!
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 19, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions
no
qb rating consists of completion %, yds per attempt, TD % and INT %. Fumbles aren’t a factor because the vast majority of qb fumbles are not their fault because they are being hit without seeing the defender.
In Romo we Trust
K, thanks.
I was just wondering. Those are my two big problems with Romo — fumbles and red zone turnovers. They’re easily fixable, so hopefully he does just that.
red zone TOs are killers
if I could pick only one area he’d improve on, its definitely that.
In Romo we Trust
Ours or Theirs???
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Which Red Zone?
I’m more concerned with TO’s in deep in our own end.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
actually the reason fumbles arent included is the metric measures passer rating not qb rating
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on Mar 16, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions
its not about how poorly he played
its tough to play against tough defenses. you expect your performance to be lesser, but what kills you about Romo is the untimeliness of his turnovers. like in the pittsburgh game with the int-td throw at the end of the game. I can’t blame him for the ravens lost because the defense just collapsed but where was the sense of urgency the whole game, plus you could still fault him for his Int at the end of the half. in the philly game, the whole team quit including romo.
the Steelers game
was the first time that one of Romo’s INTs actually cost the Cowboys the game. The vast majority of his TOs come early in games and he usually overcomes them by making plays and throwing TDs.
In Romo we Trust
it doesn't matter when the turnovers occur during the game...
they shouldn’t be happening period.
all qbs turn the ball over
even the almighty Brady and Manning…to say they shouldn’t be happening is like saying human beings shouldn’t commit sins…yeah, good luck with that.
Also, you can’t tell me turnovers late in a game aren’t more damaging than ones earlier in a game.
For example, Warners costly INT at the end of the 1st half in the SB hurt, but the Cards almost overcame it, however, if that was committed in the 4th qtr, no chance.
In Romo we Trust
Tony Romo's TO's are certainly not great
but is not like he is a turnover machine either. How often do you hear the media complain about Brees’s turnovers?
I do believe Romo could improve on turn overs, but I think to a certain extent his turnovers are over exaggerated.
Romo's TD/INT ratio is actually really good at 2:1
I’ll take a 2:1 TD/INT ratio day day of the week.
In Romo we Trust
I can live with the interceptions, as long as they're not in the red zone.
But he lost 7 fumbles in 13 games. Romo had 21 turnovers last year as opposed to Brees’s 18. And Brees played 3 more games.
fumbles are HUGE
Fumbles are huge and yes, most are the qb’s fault. Not only should fumbles lost figure into the qb rating, but fumbles recovered should as well because they are usually drive killers.
A qb needs to know when to get rid of the football. That is something Romo is terrible at. He holds onto the football way to long trying to make a gunslinging play instead of throwing it away. Yeah, sometimes he makes a brilliant play, but in the aggregate it hurts the Cowboys far more than it helps. His style of play is so frustratingly inconsistent. He can be so brilliant, but then he will almost single handedly throw a game away. That is why he will not be a successful playoff quarterback until he changes the way he plays the game – he lacks the consistency to win multiple games in a row against good competition.
by Cowboy Louie on Mar 16, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions
If he wasn't about to get blasted all the time
then maybe he could hold onto the ball. Romo has small hands for a QB. He just needs to hang with Martellus and the other coach Garrett to learn that “high & tight” thing when on the run.
The “turnover” Tony thing is huge to us because we’ve had our heart’s broken in big games. But, since he’s taken over for Bledsoe this team has always had a chance and has returned to being a thorn in every other team’s side.
Romo can only get better.
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 17, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
+1
Romo’s interceptions aren’t as big a deal as many make them out to be. They generally don’t occur in situations where he directly loses the game for us. And his td to int ratio isn’t bad considering just how much our offense relies on him.
Last year was the first year that his blind side wasn’t completely protected. We went from superb pass protection in 07 to at times downright bad protection in 08. That had a direct relationship to the increase in fumbles I think. Thats the first time in who knows how long that Romo felt any sort of blindside pressure.
That being said, he needs to learn when to tuck the ball. The fumbles when hes running left and a guys chasing him and he KNOWS the defender is within arms length and hes still trying to make a play…those are just stupid. Happened against arizona and philly. Against pitt, he made the smart play and threw with his left hand. Similarly, when its first or second down and things are breaking down around him and hes already made some incredible play ot avoid defenders…don’t try to do too much – just run forward, tuck the ball and take the yards. These probably account for half of his fumbles.
Romo has some very goofy plays each year that we’ll have to accept him for, like the blown handoff in our endzone in the philly game, but some of the fumbles are just inexcusable
Foyes.....
I agree with you. The fumbles that I have a problem with are those you just talked about. I;m not talking about when he gets blindsided. 13 fumbles is definitely too many fumbles. Fortunately, we only lost 7 of those or roughly 55% of the time.
Romo didn't quit in the eagles game..
till the end….He did stop the punting squad to run the first QB sneak of the year to get us a first down to potentially put us back in that gaem
by nicholas.rodriguez on Mar 16, 2009 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions
I wouldn't call that heart to waive off your coach.....
I call that lack of respect. I do agree that it was the right call, but it’s a lack of respect to go against your coach.
Maybe not respect
but it is wholly insubordinate, right call or not.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
He wanted to win..
That was the last game of the year for us and what I saw is a guy that didn’t want to say its over until it was over. To me it showed a guy who wants to win and will do anything to do to win. Yes it might be insubordinate but when we have been getting pummeled and it seems like the rest of the team was just ready to get out of there he said No we can win this and I am not ready to call this season over until it is
by nicholas.rodriguez on Mar 17, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
+2
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on Mar 18, 2009 12:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Is it insubordination
when your coach is trying to quit before 00:00?
Bottom line:
It was stupid for Wade to call in the punt team. The Boys were getting hammered and needed points. His D would not have won the game for them.
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 17, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions
He excels in those pressure situations
and seems to know that they always still have a chance.
That play reminded me of Manning. I wish Garrett would run more no-huddle drives early on to get the passing game to click.
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 17, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I have more of a problem with his fumbles than his interceptions.....
by texstar on Mar 16, 2009 1:34 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Same.
I understand some weren’t his fault, but he averaged one fumble per game last year, and at least half of those were probably his fault.
better OL play helps that tremendously
because if he’s not getting hit, more than likely he’s not going to fumble.
In Romo we Trust
I know, but is our O-line really that much worse than New Orleans?
Brees fumbled 7 less times. Or is that something we’re just going to have to live with, since half the time Romo makes something out of nothing?
that's where Terry and I will always disagree....
a QB always has to be responsible for himself with fumbles. How many times did we see last year when Romo was getting hit, that he still would not tuck the ball away? He still would hold the ball out instead of tucking it? Apparently, even Wade agreed because at the end of the season he said that Romo has to take care of the ball better. Before, Terry disagrees again, realize that Wade never publically says anything about his players unless it’s obvious.
I'm not disageeing
he certainly needs to improve that area of his game, I’ve always said that, however, when a qb is looking downfield in the pocket and he gets hit blindsided and therefore fumbles , I honestly can’t see how that is a qb fault.
In Romo we Trust
It is at least partly his fault
if he chooses to hold the ball too long – not just Romo, any QB. That obviously doesn’t apply to every blindside hit, but to some of them.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions
qb has to wait until his receivers get open
I can’t see how thats his fault. I know it’s a fine line, but I think he manages it well.
In Romo we Trust
No he doesn't have to wait
If the internal clock buzzes, and nobody is open, he has to be decisive and look to get rid of the ball or take off.
I am not speaking of Romo specifically.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions
And Pittsburgh had one of the worst O-lines for most of the season...
…but Big Ben and that D still managed to stay close in most of their games, enough to at least put them in a position to win ball games.
I’m glad we’ve got #9 as our starting QB — and he’s the best playmaking signal caller that we’ve had since Troy — but I just wish he made better decisions when pressured.
Celebrity or Imposter?
YOU Decide...
http://www.xanga.com/metaltometal/689036052/celebrity-or-imposter/
Believe me, I'm not here to defend Flozell.....
but you can’t put the fumbles on him. Good example was the Arizona game that Romo hurt his finger. He was in the process of being sacked but instead of either taking the sack or throwing the ball away, he ended up fumbling it. Fortunately, on this particular play, he happened to fall on it. You can’t blame the Line for that. Another example in the same game, he got lucky because in actuality he fumbled the ball, but because of the lame tuck rule he got away with that fumble. I’m not saying that the OLine doesn’t need to protect better, but you can’t blame them for a lot of Romo’s fumbles. A lot of the fumbles that he had, he was already in the grasp of a defender. He was just trying to make a play when there wasn’t one. As Parcells used to say, he needs to know when to give up on a play and live another play.
I'm not saying all the fumbles are on Flo, but a disproportionate were
Furthermore, lets go back to the stats:
Romo had 5 fumbles. Others with 5 were Farve, Flacco, and Brees. Some of those with 4 were Cutler, Ben R., Matt Ryan, and Schaub.
Like I said, Romo should work to improve the TO’s, but let’s not get carried away and act like he has some horrific turn over problem
Romo had a lot more fumbles though, that were recovered and not lost.....
According to NFL.com, Romo had 13 fumbles of which 7 were lost. That’s not too good if you ask me. He was lucky that he didn’t have more. Hey, I’m not trying to pick on the guy, but he needs to protect the ball better whether it interceptions or fumbles. You can’t blame the Oline for his mistakes either. Personally, if I were Romo, I wouldn’t want to be compared to Favre because he has always turned the ball over too much imo.
That's very odd becaus NFL.com and ESPN do not show that
I’m not sure where you are getting your stats from
Romo was trying to make a play
I’ll never fault him or any other qb for that because thats what they’re supposed to be doing, looking down field to make a play.
In Romo we Trust
yeah but sometimes enough is enough
either run with it or throw it away and hope for something better the next play.
I love how he always has his eyes downfield but sometimes enough is enough
What the French?! Toast!
+1
Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Red and Black!! Congrats boys first time in team history over .500
by aussie_cowboy on Mar 16, 2009 8:39 PM CDT up reply actions
i don't like this logic
we had games against arizona and pitt where the defense played great in the first half (AZ) and throughout the game (Pitt). By trying to make a play, all he did was set us back.
I understand the turnovers in the philly game, because the defense was not playing well either, and SOMETHING needed to happen.
Disagree
Their job is to manage the offense in a manner which optimizes the chances of winning. You can dismiss far too many errors under the guise of “trying to make a play”.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions
its the gunslinger mentality
it’s the way he plays, I know a lot of you can’t live with it as a fan, but I can because his great plays far exceed his bad plays.
In Romo we Trust
How many gunslingers
Have Superbowl titles in the last 10 years?
Even when Favre won, it was when Holmgren had him leashed.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Not to the same extent
in my opinion he was under control from 1994-1997, inclusive.
So the answer is 0 gunslingers I assume?
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
So to clarify
Your answer is that 0 QBs have been part of a winning Superbowl team in 10 years? Wow.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Allow me to rephrase the question
How many teams have won a SB in the last 10 years starting a gunslinger QB?
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
thats better
IMO Warner in 1999. Some fans don’t think of him as a gunslinger, but he is. He takes chances down field all the time.
In Romo we Trust
naw that doesnt count
wasnt his favorite target faulk… or the whole offense based on faulk.. idk i could be wrong
What the French?! Toast!
not true
Warner threw down field all the time to Holt and Bruce, he always played that way and still does.
In Romo we Trust
Seems like gunslingers
have a low rate of return
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions
QBs that have SB rings
also had great defenses, gunslinger or not. Thats the common denominator of all SB Champs.
In Romo we Trust
Basically, Switzer you made better points than Terry
and he doesn’t want to admit that you did and so it turns it into QB’s don’t win games, teams do.-lol
no thats not what I said
I said qbs don’t win games, teams win games…not rocket science.
In Romo we Trust
What is crazy is how many of Romo's fumbles they get back.
George Teague, Brock Marion, the Roy Williams-of-old: Where are you?
by Aaron Novinger on Mar 17, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions
To take it a step further......
remember when Romo first started playing for Parcells and Parcells was annoyed that Romo had a knack for fumbling the ball? At the end of the season, he had Romo hanging on to the ball with both hands. Apparently, Romo has forgotten that because he holds the ball out there where people can take a swipe at it. In fact, it’s well known among defenses that Romo is careless with the ball in how he carries it.
yeah you dont see defenders trying to lay a big hit on him or wrapping up the legs
instead they are laying out swipe the ball
What the French?! Toast!
at the end of the season
Romo fumbled the ball who knows how many times against the lions. He wasn’t good against philly either. Parcells then had romo on such a short leash in that playoff game that he practically refused to take advantage of a battered seahawks secondary.
Sorry, Romo has always had problems with fumbles. It had nothing to do with parcells, just the quality of protection and the defenses we were playing. He can avoid situations that have given him trouble with fumbles – particularly, when he tries to do too much. But he has about 4 or 5 fumbles a year when he seems to be holding the ball conservatively and he still loses it.
understandable
Its a game that most of us have tried to erase from memory
I don't really know the point of this post
I think it was in part that I don’t agree with the idea that Romo has all of a sudden gotten more loose with the football – hes the same player he was back in the parcells days, which is part of the problem. He throws less balls up for grabs (I remember defenses dropping 2 EASY ints a game that year), but has similar fumbling issues because he stil tries to do too much in situations where its obvious he should just tuck the ball or throw it away.
I think the fumbling issue was just kinda brought to light because our oline wasn’t as sound as in 2007.
I agree like the Giants game.....
when he got smashed in the end zone. He knew he was going to get the crap beat out of him. Fortunately, he swatted the ball out of the end zone but I don’t understand how he fumbled in the first place? You know someone called him Gomer Pyle one time and I think that’s a pretty good comparison. Kinda goofy in a way.
On that play, half the line did not respond to the ball being snapped and it was a jail break
I think it was on bigg’s side of the line but it was at their own goal line, so he had almost no time to try and get rid of it.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
I didn't say he threw it up for grabs....
I was responding to cowboy when he said that “he had almost no time to try and get rid of it.” I was saying that in this case it would have been better to take a sack than throw it up for grabs.
Nah...
Biggs side took care of it…I remember watching Proctor sit there in his stance while 2-3 defenders whipped by him…Flo was confused as to who to block…the left side of the line let us down on that play and Romo didn’t even have time to look before Tuck was in his face
by nicholas.rodriguez on Mar 17, 2009 12:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, what is the point of this post-haha?
My point earlier that I was trying to make, is it seems like Garrett/Wilson don’t emphasize fumbles enough to Romo. Maybe, they should work with him more on correcting this problem. If you look at the last three seasons, you will find that Romo has increased his fumbles.
2006-9 fumbles 3-lost 2007-10 fumbles-2 lost 2008-13 fumbles-7 lost
LOL!! you don't know how he fumbled??
half the Giants defense was on a jailbreak and nearly killed him, I think it would have been a miracle for him not to fumble.
In Romo we Trust
How about just fall on the ground with it then?
It’s better than slinging it out there with one hand waiting for someone to swat it out of his hand.
You just proved my point......
As a QB you gotta know when to hold em and know when to fold em. Sometimes you just can’t make a play so in this instance instead of trying to make something out of nothing just fall on the ball. Hey, I’m not really trying to harp on this one instance, because it was a no win situation, but there were other times that he did goofy things “trying to make a play.” Like Switzer said, I don’t buy into the trying to make a play logic.
there were 3 guys running unblocked at him
there was no other option but to just tuck the ball and fall yet he SOMEHOW managed to fumble while doing so.
I agree with texstar on this. Now the end result was no different than it would’ve been had romo just fallen, but there was potential for disaster there.
However, this one falls under the category of wacky turnovers where Romo at least tried to protect the ball though, which is good enough for me. The ones he has to improve on are where he tries to do to much or in some case refuses to acknowledge a defender chasing him.
Agree completely with you Foyes......
in that particular instance I was getting mad at the line for not protecting Romo better, but he has to know when to give up on a play and not try to make something out of nothing. I think he can learn to do that, but he needs to try and quit trying to make a play when there’s nothing there.
if he does that
then some of his great plays never happen like the scrambling first down against the Rams in 07 when the ball was snapped over his head.
I love his instincts even though they result in TOs sometimes.
In Romo we Trust
See that's where you are wrong.....
in 07 we were lucky to win some of those games. In 08, we didn’t win some of those so called “miraculous” games. My point is, sooner or later that style of play will catch up to you. You might pull off an upset here or there, but sooner or later it will bite you. You have to win with ball security, not some kind of rabbit out of the hat. IMO that’s partly what the problem was last year. Because of some of the unusual plays of 2007, everyone (players included) thought that Romo could do it again. He couldn’t. This proves my point. You have to protect the ball at all costs and noit try to pull some kind of rabbit out of the hat.
you sound like Parcells
I love the fact Romo pulls magical plays out of a hat and I hope he continues to do so.
In Romo we Trust
Oh, you didn't know.......
I’m related to Parcells-lol. Oh, I’m not saying the magical plays as you call them aren’t exciting but you can’t depend on those to win a game. If you do, then you have big problems because sooner or later it will catch up to you as it did in 08.
I'm not saying you should depend upon them
I’m saying you shouldn’t handcuff him to the extent that they can’t happen anymore.
In Romo we Trust
Asking him to stop being an idiot
is not exactly handcuffing him
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions
thats not being an idiot, its being creative
we just see Romo and his play differently…no big deal.
In Romo we Trust
How
was he creative in gifting the ball to the Ravens? He just made dumb decisions not to throw the ball away and attempt low percentage plays.
Do you think he should ever play the percentages, and if so, when?
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions
I think he should go with his instincts and gut
bus drivers play percentages and I’m not a fan of bus drivers like Parcells.
In Romo we Trust
So
never play the percentages?
Triple coverage, back foot. just let it rip every time? When Ed Reed catches those balls, it doesn’t bother you at all?
Is it about what you are a fan of, or what makes sense? I am a fan of winning. Moronic and selfish play may get you all aflutter, but give me Ws.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions
The problem is
he has come to expect miracles and as a result he makes imcomprehensible decisions like heaving hopeless tosses into the teeth of the Raven’s defense.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
he's expecting his all everything wr to make a play
I see Warner doing the same thing when throwing to Fitzgerald, throw it up and allow your wr to make a play.
Bradshaw used to do it all the time to Swann and Stallworth and it allowed him to make the HOF.
In Romo we Trust
So
he heaves a prayer to Roy Williams in triple coverage, a weak throw, with Ed Reed lurking, and you suggest he can reasonably expect Williams to make a play on that?
I
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 17, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Switzer, write this date down......
I said it first here. This time next year, he’ll be blaming Roy for all of Romo’s mistakes instead of T.O.
I see it now.
Please pick from the following
“Roy W is not a #1 receiver.
Roy W runs sloppy routes and has poor hands.
Every QB needs his receiver to make a play.”
Everything's looking up, Milhouse!
by accidental innuendo on Mar 17, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
i can see it now
“ROMO TO MATT JONES, 75 yards!!! TD!!”
by CowboysFan4Life on Mar 18, 2009 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions
Don't blame T.O. again....yawn...yawn....
He’s not here anymore so give up….this sounds just like the parent that everyone hates. Their kid is always getting into trouble but it can’t be his fault. It’s all the other kids fault.
yeah the ball was hiked before it was suppose to
blame it on gurode. The D was playing the ball and everyone one else was going off the snap count.. even romo thats why he bobbled it
What the French?! Toast!
Yeah I forgot about that part, I just remembered that the line was not ready.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
you are right
he played pretty well.
he should be proud of himself.
i can’t wait til nfl films comesout with a TONY IN DECEMEBER DVD
77 posts within 4 hours of this fanpost going up
and no recs? Give me a break.
by quincyyyyy on Mar 16, 2009 4:07 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
its really only a few ppl arguing
all you had to post was “romo” and “decemeber” and got the same results haha
What the French?! Toast!
haha Ham......
I’m getting mad at myself cause it’s a beautiful day outside and I keep getting caught up arguing over something so stupid as Romo and his December Swan Song. Who cares right?
wish it was nice here
oh well just another reason to play ps3 and be on btb
What the French?! Toast!
where do you live?
Here in Tx it’s about 85 degrees and sunny.
Yeah, I was up in Indy weekend before last.....
and it was in the high 60s maybe low 70s. Then a cold front came through and it got cold. What was funny was even though I was Indianapolis with my DC hoodie on, there were 3 people that came up to me and said they were Cowboy fans. Indy’s new stadium is very pretty btw. I saw it from the outside.
Romo
The thing about a young QB, and especially in this case, is that you become accustomed to your initial environment and develop from it.
Romo’s introduction to the league was behind a Sparano-coached o-line that generally stayed healthy and gave him plenty of time for him to scan the field and find open receivers. He also had one of the best blocking backs in the NFL at his side in MB3.
What we witnessed last year was Romo dealing with adversity (his injury, poor blocking up front, a new #2 WR in RW and just for kicks, T.O.‘s stupidity) and frankly, he did what lots of young QB’s do; he crumbled. What I would like to see in 2009 is a return to health along the o-line and RB corps and then let us evaluate Romo’s performance in a T.O.-free world.
If he falters, I’ll lose faith and likely change my avatar. If, however, he does what I expect him to do and flourishes, displaying headier play, with quicker check downs and more appropriate risk taking, THEN all this talk about poor play in this month or that month will all go by the wayside.
This is now Romo’s team, and even the Romo apologists know that this is a defining moment in what can still be a brilliant NFL career.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
5Blings
I have said this is a watershed year for Romo, and I really believe that. We will know what we have in the #9 jersey at the end of next season, for better or worse.
I think he can still fulfill his promise, but if there is no progress, or regression after next year, then we are in trouble. I don’t know what to expect – it all depends on my mood for the given day.
(Romo) still gets excited when he buys a new t-shirt at Target for crying out loud
by I_miss_Switzer on Mar 16, 2009 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Agreed Switzer......
and that’s why I have been saying that there will be more pressure on Romo to produce this next year. Whether people want toi admit it or not, all eyes will be on Romo. With T.O. being the lightning rod, Romo was able to hide behind him a little bit. Now that T.O. is gone, Romo has to step up to the plate and deliver because if he doesn’t , the media and fans will eat him alive.
Beer helps the mood...
Fat Tire, Stone Brew, PBR.
The more I drink, the less pressure I seem to put on Romo to win.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Young Quarterback?
Is Carson Palmer a young quarterback? How about Byron Leftwitch? Maybe Drew Henson and Rex Grossman just need a little more time to develop and mature….ok, end of sarcasm.
Bling, I always enjoy reading your comments and opinions. But we really need to stop making excuses for Tony Romo that simply aren’t true…..excuses such as he is a young quarterback who needs time to mature.
Romo entered the league in 1993, the same year as all the guys I listed above. He is not a young quarterback and he is not an inexperienced quarterback. He is in the prime of his career and will be 29 when the season starts next fall. His problems are not attributable to age or inexperience. His problems as I see them are immaturity and unwillingness to change his game to maximize the chances of his team to win.
by Cowboy Louie on Mar 16, 2009 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions
How in the world is Romo a 16 year vet, you mean 2004, he is a 5 year nfl player a 2.5 year starting vet.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
ok, typo - 2003, not 1993
But no, he is NOT a 2.5 year veteran. He went undrafted in 2003 but was signed by Dallas. Yes, he has started only 2.5 seasons but we have all seen the value of learning on an NFL roster for a few years – just look at Aaron Rodgers for one example. Romo is not some guy just learning the ropes or beginning to understand the NFL game. He will be entering his seventh nfl season. He has been on the Dallas Cowbos roster in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. That is six seasons so far. 2009 will be his seventh. By any standard or measure, he is a mature veteran who is in the prime of his career.
His peer group is listed on my previous post. Nobody on this blog would even consider those guys young and inexperienced and neither is Tony Romo.
by Cowboy Louie on Mar 17, 2009 8:06 AM CDT up reply actions
those guys have much more starting experience
thats important Louie whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
In Romo we Trust
I said 5 year vet, 2.5 starting vet, that is fact. I am not trying to downplay the bumps in
Romo’s career. I am not talking about whether or not he is experienced enough, you would do well to remember what commenters you are addressing, because for the record I am hopeful that Romo will improve but I am no apologist and believe that he needs to show definite improvement this year because TO was cut to benefit the offense which by default is him. I was just pointing out a typo and that maybe for you personally 1993 was in your mind because you miss troy; who doesn’t.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
Louie,
You have to admit that purely from a ‘how long has the guy been playing QB in the NFL’ perspective, he’s relatively young. Holding a clipboard doesn’t compare to being in the game in the same way that boot camp doesn’t compare to being in a firefight in Falloujah.
No one in their right mind would argue the need for him to mature (in a myriad of ways) and that this season is unlike his previous seasons as a starter. He has to protect the ball and put his team in a position to compete. He will face adversity this season and if he reacts the way he has previously, he won’t fare well and neither will the team. That said, I cannot support a comparison to Palmer because of the disparity of games started. It just isn’t reasonable to expect Romo to react to pressure situations he has seen once or twice in the same way that Palmer would when he has seen those same packages at least a dozen times.
To sum up, I believe this is now Romo’s team, with a Romo-friendly locker room. Assuming the o-line improves both in health and quality of play, all of us should expect Romo to elevate his own level of play and those around him. Anything less would be a disappointment and likely force Dallas to look hard at the future of the position.
"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay, the first coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
by 5Blings on Mar 18, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hey you picked a very combustible combination Romo and December play.
Ignore the Mainstream Media, EMBRACE THE HATE!!!!
Tony is a different cat.
We would all like to see the intense competitor like we saw in Troy , but that’s not his style. He has to cut down on TOs and I’m sure he knows that. I expect to see the light come on for him in a lot of ways this year. Hopefully, he will go from wanting to win to having to win.
His great plays equal to Ws
His bad plays rarely equal to Ls.
It would be great if a time comes when Romo isn’t asked to make his plays to win the games and he just has to ride a powerful team all around him, but when we’re talking about an OLine that can’t pass protect or block well (at times), when we’re talking about a Defense that allows plays at the worse possible times (Ravens and a lot of other games), when we’re talking about receivers that can’t get open, when we’re talking about injuries that cripple the team, when we’re talking about coverage mistakes and when we’re talking about a team with chemistry issues, you need all the plays that a QB can make.
Romo was the right QB for the team last season, Aikman would have gotten himself killed.
If we have another failed season in '09 with Romo at the helm
Then mark it down, we will NEVER have any success with him. And the Cowboys will most likely be spending a 2nd rounder on his successor in the following draft.
Everything's looking up, Milhouse!
by accidental innuendo on Mar 17, 2009 11:07 AM CDT reply actions
only if the failure can be attributed to him
Teams fail for a number of reasons and they are not all on the qb playing poorly.
What if Romo has a qb rating well over 95 and he makes the pro bowl, but our defense sucks and we miss the playoffs again. You still feel the same way?
In Romo we Trust
+1000
As long as he cuts down on the fumbles, which some good coaching plus experience will solve, he could keep his QB rating where it is, still above 90, and be a very successful QB. Its not all his fault that we lost but he has put us in some bad situations, on the other hand he has saved our Defense from their lapses many times. He isn’t elite yet because of turnovers but if he can cut those down, mainly fumbles, there is no one out there to make a legitimate argument that he can’t become an elite QB.
by nicholas.rodriguez on Mar 17, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Romo lost the Pittsburgh game
I think we can agree on that. Three interceptions and a lost fumble that led to 13 points (I believe).
He played great the Giants game. I believe that end zone fumble was not his fault at all but he was still charged with one, which is not fair.
His first three quarters against the Ravens was abysmal. The second Ed Reed interception cost Dallas three points. I also believe that the option pitchout to Tashard Choice was ruled a Romo fumble, which doesn’t seem fair to me. The line played ridiculously bad all game long, but then Romo led two great TD drives. Of course, we all know the defense blew that game.
The Eagles game was 44-6. Romo’s three turnovers led to 17 points. In theory, if Barber’s and Romo’s fumbles deep inside Eagles territory weren’t lost and returned for TDs, and had the Cowboys scored instead, it would have been a much closer game. But as a former Cowboy QB who was also famous for a lackadaisical attitude and not winning the big game used to say, if ifs and buts were candies and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Cliff Avril didn’t mean that thing he said about other teams contacting him
- From Cam to RGIII, and the weird psychology of draft analysis
- UCLA comes down with a case of Tebowmania
- Ellen tries to get Kate Upton to confirm Mark Sanchez is her boyfriend
- Sore loser Bully Ray spits beer in the face of Brandon Jacobs
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
