How Much Mo' Romo?
I was thinking about Danny White the other day. I liked Danny White a lot. Still do. In fact, I watched him play in one of the greatest games I ever saw. Many of you are too young to remember, but he led the Cowboys in an epic playoff struggle against the Atlanta Falcons in 1980 and if you've never seen it, try and find highlights online. It was amazing. Danny was a good QB.
I want to say he was a great QB but, unfortunately, that term is reserved only for those who have either won the Super Bowl or were prolific passers for an extended period of time such that they rank highly in the area of career statistics versus their peers. In terms of active players, the great QB's are Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers and Philip Rivers. Rivers, the only non-Super Bowl winner on that list, makes it because of his gaudy numbers coupled with his consistency.
After that, it's all a jumble of players in the next tier of QB's including Eli, Vick (eesh), Romo, Schaub, Ryan, Bradford, Flacco and Josh Freeman. Eli is on the cusp of making it into the first group and I'll leave that to the masses to argue for or against. The others have some big numbers or tons of hype (some of it warranted, some not) surrounding them. Similarly, when you rank the Dallas Cowboys QB's over the years, it's universally Staubach and Aikman on top and then there's the Merediths, LeBarons, Whites, Morton's, etc. in that next group of guys who are known for having played the position...but JUST for having played the position.
As I was considering what our guy Romo had to do to crack the list of elite QB's, it occurred to me that unless he wins AT LEAST one bling, he won't make it on his statistics alone. Why you ask? Well, the NFL has become a passing league and, as a result, has inflated the statistics for all of the QB's in the league. As evidence, Houston's Matt Schaub is on his way to being remembered as one of the most productive NFL QB's ever once he's done (assuming he continues this pace and doesn't get hurt) and that guy is no closer to winning it all than Matt Stafford. The other reason Tony has to win a bling is something else entirely. It's a hard pill to swallow, but the fact is this;
Tony Romo is getting old.
He doesn't look it, but 31 years of age is old for a QB in the NFL. Knowing that, Romo doesn't have many more chances to do the things he has to do to have his name mentioned in the same breath as the greats. Now, I'm not a stat guy and I seldom check reference material for what my eyes tell me is true (mainly because I trust my eyes more than anyone's interpretation of selectively chosen statistical nuggets aimed at proving a point) but I relented this time and went looking for info. I found this study by the US Sports Academy and, clearly, my eyes don't deceive me. Generally speaking, and for obvious physical reasons, this is a young man's game.
http://thesportdigest.com/archive/article/when-does-football-player-get-old
Here's the quote that jumped out at me;
According to Fein (2009), "a quarterback's peak age is 25 for all but one of the stats, with 26 to 28 not far behind. There seems to be a steep, upward trend at the beginning of a quarterback's career, and a gentler fall from their peak."
One piece of good news was this;
"A top flight quarterback obviously needs to possess very good arm strength and throwing accuracy and good speed and quickness, but more important sometimes is his ability to know the offense he is playing in, the ability to see the entire field, and be mentally stronger than the opponent. Those attributes are much more likely to be maintained and improved after the athlete reaches and passes his physical peak."
If you read further, while they point out the declines are slower for QB's than for other skill positions, there is still a drop off in statistical productivity. People will want to throw names like Favre, Warner, Peyton and Brady out there as QB's performing well into their early and mid/late 30's, but they're not the norm. If you believe their conclusions (and I do because my eyes tell me I should), it suggests that Romo's numbers won't be as good as the ones we saw in 2009. He's past the apex of his athleticism. So, that means Tony has to depend on his supporting cast being significantly BETTER than they were if they're going to get to the top of the NFL heap. Now, it's not like this hasn't been done before. We saw what John Elway (he of the 2 blings) did in the final years of his career when the team became more Terrell Davis-centric. There's no reason Dallas' running game couldn't become the more dominant piece of the offense...except, for what I said earlier aka ‘this is a passing league'. Few teams not named the Ravens and Steelers run the ball with any great regularity. In fact, Dallas under Garrett runs about as much as the former head of the IMF does (only when they have to). The pendulum could swing back, but that means we'd have to depend on a much better showing from our O-line in the area of run blocking and, based on who we have ready to strap on a helmet if the games were to start today, that's wishful thinking.
But we also have to consider some factors external to what's happening with Romo as we examine the future of the franchise. We all know the Cowboys went far too long to find a suitable replacement for Troy Aikman. One has to wonder if they will put themselves in that position again or not. I think they won't, especially if they have a chance to draft what they think could be a franchise QB in the first or second round next year. Now, I know many people will scoff at the notion, but let's play this out for a moment. There are several QB's that have GM's all lathered up who will likely be coming out next year. Already, 2011 looks like it could be a banner year for QB's with guys like Luck, Nick Foles, Matt Barkley, Ryan Lindley and Landry (if Dallas picked him, how quirky would that be?) Jones topping a list of what could be 9-10 QB's who are worthy of being picked in the first two or three rounds. I like Tony. I think Jerry likes Tony. But I also think Jerry likes to make a splash more than ANYTHING else. If Romo can't get the team deep into the playoffs and a Foles or a Barkley is there and Jerry thinks they could be the next Aaron Rodgers, I wonder if he would pass it up.
What about Romo's durability? In the past three seasons, he has started 16 games only once. He's not the big, stout pocket passer that many of his contemporaries are. Romo is a lither, more mobile, creative QB and while he is able to make some spectacular plays because of his ability to escape, he takes more than his share of vicious hits back there. I think Tony is a tough son-of-a-gun. But this isn't about his toughness. It's about the human body's ability to sustain the kind of punishment he has had to take behind a porous offensive line with a less-than-sound running game behind him.
Now I want to believe that Dallas has a legitimate shot at the bling this year but, then, reality sets in. This team still has huge questions surrounding the O-line, D-line and Secondary. There's a new DC in town but he can't even begin to think about installing his new schematic changes while this labor dispute drags on into the summer. It's reasonable to expect Dallas will improve if only on the strength of better practice habits and overall discipline, but that's not likely to be enough to propel them to the point where they can be considered a threat to go all the way. Not yet.
So where does that leave Tony? It leaves him needing to win it all quickly. His window is closing. Whether you believe the US Sports Academy data or not, he's closer to 35 years old than he is to 25 and no longer has the luxury of time to grow into the role of leader on a championship team. He has to win now or he will be considered an also-ran in the Dallas Cowboys Quarterback history books when all is said and done. One thing about Romo that I have always said is that, as a fan, he gives me hope. He makes me believe we can win. He has that kind of magical, special ability. I spent a few minutes with Tony in Del Mar at the Drew Brees Dream Foundation dinner (along with 1200 of my closest friends) and Tony seems very comfortable in his own skin...and yes, he won the golf tourney with a 5-under. Trust me, a lot of the fans in his gallery entourage looked like this:
But I saw a guy who'd reached "that stage" of his life. I think Tony is ready to have a family and become more balanced in terms of his lives on and off the field. But it hit me as I was talking to him. He's now just like I remember Danny White was when he had passed the age of 30; not the same athletically, but maybe the wiser for it. Who can say for sure?
In spite of all of this, the funny thing was that as I was thinking about Danny White, I remembered that White's best statistical season was at age 31...the same age Tony will be this year. HA!
:-)
GO COWBOYS!
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
736 comments
|
9 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The thing with Romo is that he may play longer than the average QB.
I mean he did sit out for 3 years. I don’t think it’s about age as much as it is about “tread”. The more a player plays, the less tread they have. I mean Tracy McGrady started declining when he turned about 27 or 28, but he had also played over 10 years in the league. At that age, some players are hitting their primes, not declining. But since T-Mac had been playing for over 10 years, his body started to break down. Hopefully that won’t happen to Romo for awhile!
+1
Besides games played and wear and tear on the body also think about the amount of reps a starting QB gets during the offseason and practices. There is a lot less tiring days for Romo’s throwing arm than most 31 year old QBs. In fact, I dare say he is the “youngest” 30 year old QB to ever start for a team. I think he has a few years before his age catches up to him…especially with an improved OL that doesn’t make him run for his life as often.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
The data says different
…and so does my eyeball test.
While he could be another Kurt Warner, it’s not likely.
As tdships aptly points out below, he and Danny White also share the fact that both became starters later in their careers. Danny was effectively done at age 32.
I don’t compare NBA stars to NFL stars because of the delta between the sports relative to physical demand. Said differently, you’re less likely to get a concussion in the NBA than you are in the NFL. There’s a reason they have full blown MRI scanners at all NFL stadiums now. At NBA arenas, they have ice packs and Neosporin.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
There is no way Romo will be done within a year.
I think your argument in the last paragraph pertains more to RBs or WRs. As a QB, Romo will not get hit as much as other players. I know he still got hit a lot with the offensive line we had last year, but it’s not like he was getting decked on every play. I would be shocked if Romo was not an above-average QB for 3-4 more years. That is also barring any more severe or year-ending injuries. Those are obviously pretty impossible to predict, since anything can happen in football.
White was not statistically all that bad as he aged...
but the team didn’t win blings.
Dallas under Jerry has a itchier trigger finger than Dallas under Brandt/Landry.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
To be honest with you, I wasn't around during the White years.
So I just took your word for it when you said “effectively done”. I agree with your assessment on the decision making of the two ownerships, but time will tell how much control Garrett has on this team. If Garrett assumes control, like Jerry says he will, I think Romo will have a longer leash than if it was Jerry making the choices.
Let's be clear
Jerry is NOT giving up personnel control to Jason Garrett.
No way, no how…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
My goodness, let's hope so
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
QB's are not as physically beat upon as they were back n the day
Rules have been put in place that thwart extra punishment towards the QB which in turn could arguably stretch their careers, no?
Fulton Greenwall: Perhaps we should slow down just a teensy-weensy bit?
Ace Ventura: Nonsense, poopy-pants.
by I am a Romosexual on May 24, 2011 7:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Good point
I wonder if that has something to do with guys like Brady, Mannning and Warner playing well for longer?
Even if it is, I think the QB’s individual performances still decline more significantly after they hit 30.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Nope, They Are in Decline
Maybe you don’t understand what “decline” means. Manning’s best year was when he was 28. Brees, when he was 28. Brady best year was when he was 30. All three have been very good since, but their best years are behind them. They are in decline.
Correct
How many Super Bowls has Brady won since he turned 29?
I hate to say it, but Peyton’s best days are behind him.
As I think about the peak for a QB, it also seems to involve an intersection of sorts.
When a QB turns 25 and hits his athletic peak, but ALSO has been in the same system for 3 seasons, it seems the production increases dramatically.
It’s purely anecdotal on my part, but I believe there’s tangible value in having stability of offensive philosophy at the same time the QB’s athletic apex is reached.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
experience is much more important
than athletic ability for a qb…they can’t be compared with other positions
In Romo we Trust
Dammit, we're benching Romo and pulling Favre outta retirement?
Just when I thought maybe the bugger’d been finally put to pasture.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Between Brady and Manning they have won the last 4 MVP's, I'd take that kinda decline
Manning at 28 had a Marvin Harrison in his prime and another superior receiver in Reggie Wayne. So other things can play a factor.
Other Things Do Play a Factor
But Harrison was towards the end of his career when Manning had his best season in 2004. Look at his stats. Harrison had his best years from 1999 to 2002…oh wait, why did he become so good in 1999? Maybe because he now was playing with the greatest quarterback of all time? :)
There seems to be confusion about what the word “decline” means. It doesn’t mean they suck. It doesn’t mean they aren’t at a championship level. It does mean they weren’t as good as they were before. Using that definition, the fact they are in decline isn’t controversial.
by kindablue on May 25, 2011 8:23 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Clicky-clicky on the Rec'y rec'y.
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions
strongly disagree
Just because they had their best years a few years back doesn’t mean they are in decline. Manning and Brady are every bit as good as they were 5 years ago…anybody watching them play can clearly see that.
Neither one has lost anything.
In Romo we Trust
You don't think time and injury has robbed them of ANYTHING?
You don’t think Peyton’s second neck surgery is compromising his athletic ability?
Brady’s total knee reconstruction has not robbed him of one iota of mobility?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
nope, they still throw the rock and are as accurate as ever
and neither one had any athletic ability to lose in the first place, so I see no differences in their games at all.
In Romo we Trust
Stop talking foolishness
Wait. The sheer idiocy of “Just because they had their best years a few years back doesn’t mean they are in decline” has me laughing too hard.
What?! So one has their “best years” but doesn’t decline? They stay “every bit as good” or improve? So then aren’t they still having their “best years”?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Now who's interacting with blatherskites?
;-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Ahhh, but did I not admit to being like you? Even to needing them?
Feline-like. Or holding out Hope.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Variety (of perspective) is the spice of life
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It's true
Just because you’re not improving on your numbers each year doesn’t mean you’re declining…either qb could put up great numbers this season, it doesn’t mean they’re declining….that is what is sheer foolishness
In Romo we Trust
Neither "best" nor "decline" were defined...
…as being numerically-based statistical performance metrics or not. Additionally, neither were used in such a manner. Either way, to debate “best” and/or “decline” without prior agreed-upon definition of the terms in question, to frame the context of the debate, is foolishness.
But to avoid both the “numbers” and the need to agree upon the specific definitions of said terms to be utilized and simply use their commonly understood meanings relative to each other to point out an inconsistency in an argument, a flaw as it were, is anything but sheer foolishness.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
It's not MY data
…and I am sure yours (whatever that may be) is better.
Righttttttttttttttttttttt.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Why do you bother with this blatherskite?
Stubborness? Tenacity? Masochism? Toying with prey like a cat with a mouse? Self-amusement?
Hope?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I appreciate all viewpoints
…however unfounded or outlandish they may be.
And yeah, those cats do have tons of fun, don’t they?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
As much as it may seem otherwise...
So do I. I need them. Wise and otherwise.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Central to the beliefs of our Founding Fathers
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Not them alone
It goes beyond a People, to all Peoples.
I speak as one of the s’s.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Manning, Brady and Brees are my proof
as well as many other great qbs throughout history
In Romo we Trust
But Terry...
aren’t they the exceptions to the rule?
Aren’t they good examples in favor of your view because they are notable for being anomalous?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I think that they are exceptions, not the rule
but romo has been on pace to break all of his records year after year, no? If he hadn’t gotten hurt in 08 or 10 it was my understanding he had been statistically gaining ground in most fields… If anyone can be the exception to the rule why not someone exceptional?
Fulton Greenwall: Perhaps we should slow down just a teensy-weensy bit?
Ace Ventura: Nonsense, poopy-pants.
by I am a Romosexual on May 25, 2011 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions
And isn't it relative?
“decline” for Brees, Manning, or Brady after historic seasons is still better than the majority of NFL QB’s
Fulton Greenwall: Perhaps we should slow down just a teensy-weensy bit?
Ace Ventura: Nonsense, poopy-pants.
by I am a Romosexual on May 25, 2011 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions
So you bank on anomalies as a matter-of-course?
Well, pull up a chair, partner. Game’s called poker.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Not sure how I'm banking on anamolies
Fulton Greenwall: Perhaps we should slow down just a teensy-weensy bit?
Ace Ventura: Nonsense, poopy-pants.
by I am a Romosexual on May 25, 2011 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Look up "exception". Look up "anomaly". Look at what you said.
Think about it. Not sure you’ll get it, but it should come to you sometime. I hope. But I’m not sure.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I think it has something to do with
…using these guys (Brees, Manning and Brady) as your baseline when in fact there are 32 teams, many of which have revolving doors at QB (that was us too not long ago) whose QB’s make spashes and then fizzle due to injury, age, surrounding talent level decline, etc.
It’s far, far more likely for a QB, even one like Romo, to have an overall experience like people not named Brees, Manning or Brady.
That’s the central reason why his stats at age 31 look more like career numbers for QB’s who are years younger than him.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Romo isn't average as you imply
He’s much closer to guys like Manning, Brady and Brees than the other starting NFL qbs.
And you’re wrong about the reason for his career numbers…..he was a project who took a while to develop and start….has nothing to do with the reason you give.
In Romo we Trust
So you don't think that playing those 13 games he missed would help his career numbers relative to his peers?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It would help his volume career numbers
It’s not going to hurt the numbers that count which are TD%, INT%, yards per attempt and completion percentage.
Those stats are more important than total yards or TDs you have thrown in your career.
Using your argument, Bret Favre was the greatest qb of all time then.
In Romo we Trust
In many circles, he is viewed that way
He did it at a high level for a long time.
That’s one big measure of greatness.
The numbers you use are more obscure and don’t generally get guys into the discussion about all-time greats.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I don't think they are exceptions
because I’ve stated many times you have to look at really good players, not every starter in the league. The great ones peak in their 30s….Romo will be no exception.
In Romo we Trust
yoop, this is true
…but everybody was amazed at that performance. Why? Because it is an ANOMALY.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
People aren't bringing out exceptions in order to disprove something across-the-board.
They’re doing it to say, “Hey, wait a second… not necessarily.”
by Admiral Dallas on May 26, 2011 7:12 AM CDT up reply actions
You used the word "exception"
So have I.
As a result, we agree that they are exactly that. They are called that for a reason because they are exceptional relative to what we believe happens MOST of the time.
Nothing is guaranteed, so all you can do is look at likelihoods based on historical trends. As a result, the exceptions have to be viewed as outliers.
The likelihood is that Romo will not be an exception. He could be. But, again, it’s not likely.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
No, the likelihood is that Romo will be an exception
based upon how good he has been so far in his career. Top 5 all time qb rating….you can’t tell me thats not exceptional.
In Romo we Trust
QB rating doesn't get you blings
…and it doesn’t come up in HOF voting.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Hey, wait a second...
If we didn’t get to wait a second for that how’d-he-do-that, did-you-see-that, watch-the-replay, you-gotta-see…
What fun’d there be in the game. Or watching it. Or the debate.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I think this post makes it clear
That few people on here like to debate…wait
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Good stuff
First, I was at that ATL game. Flying back from DC visiting college friends to HOU where I lived, I realized I was laying over in ATL the day of the game and delayed my connection accordingly. Suffice to say I left a very quiet Fulton County Coliseum that day to catch my 2nd flight. It may have been Danny’s finest game.
Couple of compare and contrast with Danny and Tony Romo – both became starters after several seasons in the league, so they were relatively ‘low mileage’ in their early 30’s. To an extent, that’s where the comparison really stops. Danny was never as athletic as Tony, not nearly as mobile and while neither has a rocket, TR has the stronger arm. I can’t remember the specific season, but he was on his way to what I thought was his career best year when he broke his wrist on his throwing arm @ the NY Giants. Pardon me while I throw up in my mouth a little at the thought of ‘holding – #75’(Phil Pozderek).
I think Tony’s athleticism serves him well along with his mutli-sport talent Realistically, we are in a 3-5 year window. This window is crucial, in that DAL seems to never re-stock prior to critical need, but only in response to the crisis du jour. That said, even with our woeful Defensive performance last year, we finally started to invest in OLine. In a way, maybe all bets are off for conventional wisdom this season and DAL could surprise some people. But I believe we’re still at least a season away. That damn 2007 season was really Tony’s and Dallas’ window.
We live life forwards and understand it backwards
Yes!
Dallas doesn’t have a proactive view of how to maintain talented depth on their roster except, obviously as it applies to RB’s and LB’s.
Well said.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Rec'd
Another mostly positive post… No more marshmellow camps for you, Blings, you’re getting too soft.
Arnold, almost 5 years of good memories, you'll be missed.
Viva México! Go Cowboys!
I'm getting in touch with my inner Winnie
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Danny White!!! Great Qb/Punter,boy,that takes me back!!
IMHO,if the OG #88 had of been able to break one more fingertip tackle,then “The Catch” and the 49ers dynasty would have had to wait.I believe with all my heart that if we would have won the SF game,Cincy didn’t stand a chance vs Dallas.Danny White would have had a Bling, deservedly so imo,and history would have remembered him in a better light.I really liked D White as our Qb.
Romo still has 3-5 years in that window.With just a couple of “tweaks”(this draft was a very good start),a FS,DL,and an OG in free agency we are right back in it.IMHO,getting these guys to believe in themselves could get us there this year. Great post though,Rec’d.
Dallas Cowboys Rule!!!
nothing new to add
I kinda think everyone else summed it up. Romo doesnt have the normal wear and tear of other 31 year old QB’s. One he sat for 3 years and 2 when he did start he had a great Oline (this year not withstanding) and when he did go down it wasnt a result of constant pummeling he just went done on his collarbone awkwardly if anything this years injury may have prolonged his career as he didnt have to take the beating for 16 games. If the Oline improves he could be effective for 6 or 7 more years but the championship window is probably 3 years.
I'd like to be where that T-back is.
Lock n Load
by DIRE WOLF on May 23, 2011 5:20 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
Come on, DW!!
That’s the one comment I get from you on this post?
LOL!!!
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Great Post, Blings
I agree with virtually everything you said.
Okay, I know you don’t like stats, but my points per pass metric which is grounded in statistical regressions, and which squares very well with common sense, says the average NFL quarterback, taking into account the entire history of the league, reaches his peak at…age 27. Bill James reached exactly the same conclusion with MLB players back in the 1980’s.
I also agree with your evaluation of the graceful decline phase. Really good quarterbacks can be productive until they are age 34 to 37. The odds are Romo’s best years are behind him, although it’s entirely possible he still has a few really good ones left in him.
Like you, my concern with Romo is not his performance. He’s a very, very good NFL quarterback. He’s not elite, but he’s pretty close. My concern is he is more fragile than most NFL quarterbacks. He gets hit a lot, but so does Roethlisberger and so did Warner, and so did many other very good quarterbacks playing behind shaky lines. They kept on playing, but Romo seems more and more susceptible to getting knocked out. Which should come as no surprise, as he’s older and bodies can’t take the punishment at 31 they did at 24.
So, in a word I agree with most everything you said.
If disagree with you on anything, it’s with Danny White. He threw way too many interceptions to be near Romo’s level, even after I adjust his performance for a less pass-happy league. And by my measures, White’s best year was 1981, when he was 30.
Here's the thing about White
If you look at the team and how it performed after he was done, it suffered a precipitous downfall.
I think Danny carried that team for a while after Staubach retired, Everson Walls notwithstanding.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I See It Differently
White always had on his teams Tony Dorsett, the second-best tight end in franchise history, Randy White, Tony Hill most of that time and other fine receivers like Drew Pearson, Butch Johnson and Ray Renfro, Herschel Walker the final few years, two Pro Bowl offensive linemen the first few years, Walls, Bob Bruenig, et al. It wasn’t the embarrassment of riches of the 1971 or 1993 team, but it was a pretty talented roster, including two future HoFers and several Pro Bowl players. The defense was up and down while White was QB, but even when it was up, he still wasn’t an elite passer—far too many interceptions.
I felt bad for Danny back then, because he took the losses so hard and he was the quarterback who replaced Roger Staubach. In retrospect, however, I see him as just a decent, slightly-above average quarterback.
But weren't those names on defense past their primes in the early 80's?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Cowboys defenses in early 80s were bad
All of our great defensive players from the late 70s were old and slowing down.
White was a great qb, would have easily lead the Cowboys to multiple SBs with a very good defense…just like Romo would do if he ever gets one.
In Romo we Trust
He was good, not great
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
White was great, our defenses were bad
If he wasn’t great, we never sniff three NFC championship games in a row…we lost all three because of defensive failures
In Romo we Trust
You've Got It Backwards
White was average because he turned the ball over too much. The 1981, 1982 and 1984 defenses were very good; the 1980, 1983, 1985 and 1986 defenses were mediocre, and the 1987 and 1988 defenses were bad. The defense played well enough in the really good years for this team to win a Super Bowl, but White held them back. As I said before, the defense was up and down in the 1980s, but the best defensive teams were early in the decade.
It’s funny about your comment the defenses lost the Championship Games. Against San Francisco, White had three turnovers, the last of which iced the game for the 49ers, while the Dallas defense forced six turnovers, but the offense couldn’t do much with it.
So…you’re pretty much completely mixed up.
no you have it backwards
The defense played horrible in those championship games, go back and watch them again and you’ll see you’re wrong about both White and the defense.
As I recall we scored plenty of points to beat the 49ers but the defense started the beginning of the Montana legacy in SF….they were horrible on that drive.
80 championship game they made Wilbert Montgomery look like a HOFer.
In Romo we Trust
No, I Just Watched the Entire Game Again
And your memory has no relation to reality. The reason Dallas lost was because Danny White played terrible. But before we get to that, let’s see how well you recall about how Dallas scored their 27 points:
Dallas drove a whopping 44 yards to kick their first field goal. White was wild with a lot of his throws, with the devastating combination of being high and behind his receivers, exposing them to needless hits. The offensive line played well on this and all the other drives, giving White plenty of time to throw.
Dallas’s first TD came because the defense you despise so much handed the ball to the offense at the SF29. White did throw a nice sideline pass to Drew Pearson for the TD, but I would hope we would score a touchdown with that kind of field position.
Dallas’ second TD was the result of a blown call. White threw a terrible pass that Ronnie Lott intercepted, but a bogus pass interference against Lott set Dallas up inside the SF 10 for an easy touchdown. The replays showed Lott had position and was turned and facing the ball; I’m a Cowboys fan but Lott got screwed on that call, which was a 40 yard penalty.
Dallas’ next field goal was also set up by a bad pass by White that resulted in pass interference. He badly underthrew Butch Johnson, but this time Lott didn’t turn around, so when Johnson tried to make the catch, the PI call was legitimate. That penalty got them into field goal range, but White could not convert a crucial third down pass to Cosbie for a touchdown, despite having several seconds to throw.
Dallas’ final TD came as the result of another short field, after the defense forced another fumble at midfield. White did have a beautiful pass to Cosbie for a 24 yard touchdown, but that was one of his few moments where his judgment and accuracy were competent.
On the final drive, White fumbled the ball and gave the game away. So much for how our hero performed in the clutch. He also threw a killer interception in the third quarter that gave the ball to San Francisco at the Dallas 13 and gifted them with an easy touchdown. Like many of his passes, this one was poorly thrown. There were also other plays where he hung on to the ball way too long, the most disastrous of which led to a 12 yard intentional grounding penalty which killed our field position. In a word, Danny White was awful, except for a few good passes. I counted three of them the whole game.
On the other hand, Dallas’ defense was very physical, jarring the ball loose, dominating the line of scrimmage and generating constant pressure. White has a lot of time to throw that day; Montana was almost constantly under pressure. White threw tons of bad passes despite having plenty of time; Montana threw excellent passes with a rush in his face the entire game.
Dallas’ defense gave up touchdown drives of 63, 47, 13 and 90 yards, against one of the greatest offenses of all time, on the road. It’s not like San Fran was driving the length of the field every time they touched the ball. Most importantly, they generated six turnovers. Had Danny White done an solid job that day, we would have won by two touchdowns. He didn’t, and we lost.
Danny White was not a great quarterback. He was average, surrounded by championship talent. Montana, on the other hand, was one of the greatest quarterbacks on league history. It was obvious who was the great quarterback and who was average on that day.
But somehow the mythology of Danny White the Martyr persists to this day, although it has no relation to reality.
Did you watch online or have the DVD?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
No doubt he had some stinkers
…but that Niner secondary was the best in the NFL and started a batch of rookies.
I don’t recall a lot of open receivers in that game. Having watched it, did you see him miss a lot of open pass catchers?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
About your "batch of rookies"...
Precisely. Walsh went out and defenced the WCO before unleashing it. Coordinated plan.
My question remains, is RR’s D the defencing of JG’s O?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
No, I don't think so
I think he was simply the best 3-4 guy out there for us to pick from.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
So another...
style D is more suited, more likely to be more effective, in containing this multiple-target, multiple-possibilities, multiple-option, dynamic offensive scheme so many seem to be expecting?
What D might that be? Other than every one of our opponents, that is. Seriously, whose or what defensive scheme do you see as being more capable of negating such an offense, if it were to exist?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Dick Le Beau's 3-4 has stood the test of time like no other
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
San Fran Had a Very Good Defense That Year
I don’t want to leave you with the impression White was repeatedly throwing the ball ten feet over the head guys wide open with no one within 10 yards of them.
You are right, there were not a lot of open receivers. But that’s what happens in Championship Games. All the crappy secondaries are home watching the game on TV. If we’re going to claim Danny White is a great quarterback, doesn’t that mean he should be able to put the ball in a spot where a covered but not completely blanketed receiver should be able to catch it without having to break stride, lunge backwards and leap for it? And if someone were truly not open, should exercise good judgment and throw the ball away instead of just sitting back in the pocket for 11 seconds (as I counted on one play), waiting to get hammered?
I hated the 49ers with a blue passion, almost as much as a hated Redskins, which is nearly on a blind, unthinking, completely reactionary level. No other Cowboys loss ever hurt as much as that game, not Super Bowl V, not Super Bowl XIV, the 1994 NFC Championship, none of them felt like the dagger in my heart of that game. But in retrospect, with three decades to put between me and that heartbreak, it is obvious the two teams were about even, but what separated them was the play of the quarterbacks. One was a Hall of Fame, the other was not even close.
I can't argue with you on that
…especially in clutch situations in big games.
That’s Big Ben’s trademark.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Big Ben
Grrrr…now you’ve pushed my hot button. How the hell can a quarterback look terrible until it’s 3rd and 12, then hit guys in stride for 20 yard gains? How can he go from Ryan Leaf to Steve Young in just two plays? And, and…
Okay, I need to stop now. Deep breaths, deep breaths…
He just wins, baby
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Tell that to Danny White
…Everson Walls and the rest of the players on the field who watched The Catch.
Montana did it many times. Elway too. So did Roger.
Some guys just have that THING.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Wrong, sorry kb, just plain wrong....
“And your memory has no relation to reality.”
It’s an inverse relationship.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
White in the last moments almost one that game when in hit Pearson. But you are right White had a terrible game.
White was better than an average QB nevertheless. How many times did he bring the Cowboys from behind?
The record shows that White was a solid QB.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 4, 2011 7:21 AM CDT up reply actions
Solid QB
I wonder how Romo will measure up to that…
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I'd be careful when comparing yards
Different times, different rules.
Instead, you have to compare him to his peers in this era.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Too Many Interceptions
Above average quarterbacks didn’t turn the ball over as much as he did. Turnovers are the currency of football wins, and Danny White was destitute in that area. He only is even considered in the discussion because he piled up tons of passing yards.
He threw more TDs than interceptions in his career unlike Joe Namath.
White has sold numbers along with a nice WL record.
Probably was better than Jim" McMahon. Was probably just as good as Marc Rypian.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 5, 2011 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions
Apples and Oranges
Namath played before passing rules were liberalized and passing stats started to go through the roof. You have to normalize their performance for the era they played, and under that basis Namath would rank slightly better.
I rate both McMahon and Rypien higher. Both had up and down careers, but their best four years were much better than what White put up. They were championship-class performances, which White never approached.
Oranges and Strawberries
Namath Romo played before after passing rules were liberalized and passing stats started to go through the roof. Normalize Namath-, White- and Romo-era QB performances, or Meredith/Fouts/Manning? It’s not enough to take the stats and “adjust” them. Context need be considered. The situations are different, for each player, each era, each play.
When the Cowboys won a Super Bowl game, in that moment, was a stat, even the score, the primary thing on your mind?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
You always look at the numbers relative to a players peers
Which is of course what I did in this post a year ago.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jun 5, 2011 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions
So, you're an expert on statistics?
And you’ve done multivariate analysis on the importance of certain statistics, and can speak with confidence on their influence? And you’ve found using null hypothesis testing or some other accepted method that every play is so different that no comparisons can be made between them? Remarkable!
Or, are you simply uninformed and hostile to the whole notion of using statistical analysis in sports? It sounds more like the latter…
Nope, no expert
Neither claimed to be nor put myself forth as one. And don’t need statistical methodologies to tell me all the number-juggling analysis in the world isn’t going to make a call made on such a basis anything more than speculative opinion, not certainty. Kinda like it that way.
Same way I like seeing some numbers-junkies get all bent outta shape when their pleasant diversion is questioned.
I’ve nothing whatsoever against the use of statistical analysis related to sports or anything else. I’m neither ignorant nor expert, neither a true-believer nor hostile. Just someone who doesn’t buy into the deterministic mindset so often evidenced by proponents of statistics.
btw, you didn’t answer the question. Something else I find many numbers-junkies unable to do. Answer a simple question simply. Ya gotta excuse me, kb, I’m just a simpleton.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
How was McMahons best year better than Whites’ best year?
He won a SB but that was cause of the defense of the 1985 Bears D.
Look at Jim" McMahons’ career here.
http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=MCM166115
Never thew for 20 TDs or 3000 years even once. Only threw for 300 yards in a game once.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 5, 2011 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Um, I don't need to go to the internet
To look up McMahon’s career—I have a database with every season of every quarterback in league history. We’re probably going to be talking past each other—it sounds like you are seduced by gaudy passing yardage and touchdowns, but are ignoring why teams win or lose, which is offensive passing efficiency. If a QB has a high net yards per attempt and has a low interception and fumble rate, he’s efficient and maximizes the generation of offensive points, and those are the quarterbacks who help their team win. His next year was almost as good, and the Bears won the Super Bowl. White never had a single year in his career that was even close to those two.
In 1985 there was a period where the Bears outscored the other team 104 -3 without McMahon.
One of those games they best the Cowboys 44-0 without McMahon.
All during 1985 the Bears were killing the other team no matter who their QB was whether it be Tomzack or Steve Fuller.
I get the feeling the Bears would have been great even with Ryan Leaf as the QB that year.
The 1985 Bears defense was perhaps the best ever along with that of the 1975 Steelers. Sorry to say it was even better than the best defense the Cowboys ever had.
The 1985 Bears defense didn’t just stop the other team it scored a boatload of points just by themselves.
What would Danny White have done if he had that kind of defense behind him?
In fact the Cowboys offense statically was just about as good as it was with White as it was with Staubach. No way I am not saying White was as good as Staubach but I am saying the record shows that he was a solid , above average QB.
And for the record White had a better TD to interception ratio than did McMahon during his career.
White 155 TD passes and 132 Interceptions.
McMahon 100 TDs and 90 Interceptions for his career.
In 1985 the best year for the Bears McMahon had 15 TDs and 12 interceptions. That is not a good ratio.
The next year 1986 he threw 5 Td passes and 8 interceptions. White was better than that even after he broke his wrist!
In 1987 McMahon thew 12 TDs and 8 interceptions.
Those were the two best years the Bears ever had.
29 wins – 3 and three loses,
In 1983 White threw almost as many TD 29 passes as McMahon did during the 3 best years for the Bears.
Joe Montana and John Elway are known for comebacks but more than a few of theirs came against weak teams too.
I think a lot of your analysis especially the 1981 NFC championship is very good , but it seems you are holding White to the Rodger Staubach , Troy Aikman standard. Or the Joe Montana standard.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 6, 2011 6:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Well, the assertion made at one point
Was that Danny White was a great quarterback. Great quarterbacks get compared by definition to other great quarterbacks. I don’t hate Danny White, but he was rarely more than an average NFL quarterback in any year of his career, although by my measures his 1981 and 1985 seasons were pretty good, a little better than average. The reason? He threw too many interceptions in all those years.
I don’t disagree the 1985 Bears defense made life easier for McMahon. But look at the other best defenses I’ve ever seen, the 1976 Steelers and the 1991 Eagles. Both teams were quarterback deficient at the end of the season, neither made the Super Bowl, and the Eagles team didn’t even make the playoffs. So while McMahon did not light it up like Steve Young, he did manage the game efficiently and enhanced their chances of winning. As I said, by my measures, 1984 was his best season, and 1985 he was also very good. The rest of his career was actually below average. But if a team wants to win a Super Bowl, you have to have a season like McMahon did those two years.
And we still seem to be talking past each other. My measure is net passing yards per attempt adjusted for turnovers. That’s what’s been found to most contribute to wins. TD to interception ratio, which is what you’re using, doesn’t capture that efficiency nearly as well. It might be better than the NFL efficiency stats, which have out-of-balance weights, but it’s not as good as what I use.
Also Danny Whites’s Cowboys team’s scored a lot of points. 454 in 1980 and 479 in 1983.
By most measures White was a good NFL QB. Wins. Stats, NFL efficiency stats, completion % . And points.
Sure the Cowboys had Hill , Pearson and Dorsett. But so did Staubach, and the Cowboys under White performed more or less as well as they did under Staubach. As I said White wasn’t Staubach. But there is no way the Cowboys offense would have performed as well as it did if White wasn’t a decent – above average QB.
Even Staubach wasn’t perfect all the time either. He had a pretty bad three and a half quarters half against the Steelers in Superbowl 13.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 6, 2011 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions
You keep fastidiously ignoring
White’s most distinguishing asset: His propensity to generate turnovers. Games are won, first and foremost, by who makes the fewest turnovers. Gaudy passing stats are nice, but they are worth little if the quarterback is throwing 20+ picks a season.
The reason the offense scored so many points is because the defense was able to generate more turnovers than White was able to create himself. They also in those two years scored four and five touchdowns respectively.
Until you can come to grips with how important turnovers are to who wins and loses games, we are going to be talking past each other. All the other circumstantial evidence you present is unconvincing to me because it fails to address the single most important statistic in football, one in which Danny White did poorly.
So do you think the success the team had under White was DESPITE him?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
White had a lot of good games
and he brought the Cowboys from behind on lots of occasions.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 4, 2011 7:16 AM CDT up reply actions
He Had a Few
Atlanta in the 1980 Divisional Playoffs, Miami in the 1981 regular season, the season opener in 1983 against Washington…that’s three where he played well in comebacks. I can’t remember any others. There were some other close games Dallas won, but White had a ton of interceptions; had he played well to begin with, they would not have been so far behind in the first place. Look at the really good quarterbacks. They don’t constantly put their team behind the eightball with turnovers. Danny White made a career of doing just that.
There's more
Tampa, SD and Philly finale in 1980, New England game in 1981, Houston in 1982, @ Philly in 1983 (one of his best), along with St. Louis and Seattle games that were very good, Philly and St. Louis in 1985, ATL in 1986 and I think he played more than well enough to beat SF in that playoff game until Pillers sacked him.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Okay
Let’s take the games one at a time:
1980 SD is kind of marginal to me. We trailed by ten at the half, and the Chargers turnovers in the second half set up a lot of those points, not Danny White. He did play well, though, and we did come from behind, so I’m not going to fight over it.
1980 Tampa: Another ten point first half deficit comeback, against a really bad team at home. If you say so!
1980 Philly finale was the Championship game, and White laid an egg. If you mean the regular season finale, we never trailed in that game. Not sure why you included this.
1981 New England, we never trailed in that game. The Pats scored a couple of late TDs to tie it, and White did drive for the winning field goal. Not really a comeback.
1982 Houston: I have no idea what you’re thinking about. Houston was awful that year and we blew them out. We trailed in the first quarter, but winning 37-7 is hardly a comeback. Sorry, fail.
1983 Philadelphia: If you say so. We tied the game in the second quarter and never trailed in the second half.
1983 St. Louis: We were ahead at halftime, although we did trail 10-0 early. It looks like you’re saying anytime we trailed by more than a touchdown in the first quarter and went on to win, even against a really bad team at home, White should get credit for the comeback. I don’t see it that way. To me, at minimum we should be overcoming a fourth quarter deficit, with bonus points for doing it against good teams, and more bonus points if on the road.
1983 Seattle: We never trailed, and blew them out. Maybe you were thinking of another game?
1985 Philadelphia: The most we ever trailed by was three points, and that was in the first quarter—well, early into the second. There’s no way I consider this a comeback.
1985 St Louis: Another three point, second quarter deficit overcome. At home. Against a horrible team. I would never count this game as a comeback.
1986 Atlanta: Now you’re really stretching things. In order to have a comeback, you have to win! We lost.
well enough to beat SF in that playoff game
Recall my review of the entire game above. White’s accuracy was pretty bad the whole game.
Well, I think we need to define what playing a good game is...
because for me, it’s doing the things called for by the coaches in the game situations that lead the team to victory. I think you can still play poorly and have your team overcome it for a win, but in the cases I used, I picked games where Danny’s either made big plays or was highly efficient in his play.
The other thing is that if you take the strength of your opponent into consideration, then that changes everything. Romo led an amazing comeback against buffalo a few years back. Is it any less of a 2nd half performance by Romo because Buffalo was a bad team?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
We agree
I tend to devalue the Buffalo game, because a) Romo played like crap most of the game and b) they were not very good that year. It was an exciting game, but hardly one to brag about.
It looks like you might have switched subjects on me. The thread was discussing White’s ability to bring his team back, which I interpreted as a comeback. He did have several good games in his career, but also his share of stinkers. He was not a clutch quarterback, and I don’t think he had many of what I would call true comebacks.
Yes, I wouldn't say he was clutch
Would you say Romo is?
If you applied your comeback definition, as is, to Romo’s career, would he be considered clutch?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Hard to answer
He’s played pretty well in late-game, trailing situations: Seattle playoff game, didn’t play badly in the Giants playoff game, several late come-from-behind wins. He’s definitely not a choker. But most of his come-from-behind wins were against bad teams like Buffalo and Detroit in 2007.
1985 against the Giants. Did throw 4 Ints but also threw 3 TDs. Brought the Cowboys back against a pretty good defense.
1986 opener against the Giants.
In fact look at his record against the Giants when the Giants were at their peek.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 5, 2011 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions
Didn't Count the 1985 Game
Because White played so poorly, and the Giants melted down at the end when all they had to do was just run out the clock to win.
I forgot about the 1986 season opener; we should count that one. My memories of that game were Herschell Walker breaking several tackles for big gains, but it looks like White played well that game.
The Reason White's Record
Was so good against the Giants was because Phil Simms had some the worst games in his NFL career against the Cowboys, especially after 1984. He always threw at least one, and usually several interceptions. That doesn’t mean Danny White “won” those games—the Dallas defense did.
Semantics Discussion
Since we have a chance of once again hitting the magic 1000 comment mark, I’ll try to do my part by rekindling some secondary conversations.
I’m curious, how would you define a comeback? What criteria must be met to qualify?
I have a very specific definition, which I’ve hinted at above, but I don’t want to influence your decision.
First, I don't believe in goal-seek methodology around comments
…but if the conversation is engaging, we see where it goes. Fair?
I don’t think a comeback can be measured until the 4th quarter of a game. Said differently, if you overcome a halftime lead in the 3rd and never trail in the 4th quarter, that wouldn’t constitute a comeback in my eyes.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
The 1k comment
was more just playing around. You have an exceptional ability to keep conversations going, where with many other fanposts they tend to die out after a few days. The 1k mark is never out of the reach of 5Blings.
I would define a comeback much like you. Here’s my conditions for a comeback:
- Team trailed by more than six points in the fourth quarter.
- Team ended up winning the game with at least two offensive scores in the fourth quarter and overtime.
- One of the scores was a touchdown drive that went for at least 40 yards.
- The quarterback passed for more than half the yards accumulated in those drives to get both scores.
Lots of rules, but I think it’s fair. Thoughts?
I never considered the notion of two scores and the more-than-6 down in the 4th quarter and could envision some scenarios where that might be too limiting
For instance, if a team is 16 points down at half, makes up 10 of the deficit in the third (let’s say that the team coming back scores 17 and the leading team gets 7) and through a scoreless 4th quarter, is able to get the final 7 on a last minute TD, I’d have trouble saying that wasn’t a comeback win. Maybe it’s nitpicking, but you know football is wild and woolly.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Good point
So maybe I’m being too stringent. I wanted to exclude the situation where a team got a gift turnover deep in opponent’s territory and pounded it in with a couple of short yardage runs for the winning touchdown. That wasn’t a comeback, because the QB didn’t do much. On the other hand, Staubach scoring 17 points in the final six minutes of the 1972 divisional playoffs against San Francisco is about as miraculous as they get, so I wanted to really value those.
Maybe have different classes of comebacks? I just realized my definition excluded the Hail Mary game, because we didn’t score twice, and were never down by more than four points. So I need to rethink this thing, one size doesn’t fit all…
Hail mary game would not qual as a comeback... Just clutch.
On top of your conditions, I would add down by >17 in second half (until recently 17 points was huge,), converting multiple third downs on scoring drives even if RB broke a long run and accumulated >50% of yards, also if QB contributed through scrambling for FDs or improvised and made a play that went into books as a run.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 6, 2011 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions
The more I think about this, the more I wonder
…if you applied this filter to some of the great “comeback QB’s” of all time, how many of their comebacks would be erased?
Take Staubach, Elway and Montana. How many of their comebacks would be nullified using this definition?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Elway's drive
Would be considered a comeback, as would Staubach’s miracles in 1972 (SF) and 1979 (Wash). It would not count the Hail Mary game, nor Montana’s game against Dallas in 1981. So clearly I need to go back to the drawing board to give those sorts of game credit.
And thanks, kb
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I love Romo
but your right, he is 31
I would draft a cornerback safety or pass rusher next year but if Landry Jones is available I think we should seriously think about drafting him
we need to get a good young quarterback to groom, you never know
Bruce Carter+Sean Lee=BRUCE LEE!!!!
by Archie Barberio on May 23, 2011 5:34 PM CDT reply actions
I would never forgive myself
If I had to root for a Sooner QB, gag me
Now broadcasted in over 20 languages on over 15 continents.
I do agree there
I think Romo is a top ten QB in the NFL, but as a fan your right he gives you hope
you know if Romo plays at his best this team has a chance to win every Sunday
he just has that magic as you describe, not everyone has that
Bruce Carter+Sean Lee=BRUCE LEE!!!!
by Archie Barberio on May 23, 2011 5:39 PM CDT reply actions
Romo started late in his career,
so in terms of injury years he’s not as banged up as Troy was, ie, concussions, etc. So, I think he’s got a good 5-6 years as a productive QB left in him barring future injuries and a good OL. I agree though that, if he’s ever to be considered for the HOF, he’d better start winning championships.
5-6 years?
HIGHLY doubtful.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You also said you'd be shocked if Jason Williams didn't turn out to be a very good player
Are you often shocked? And if so, at some point, does it stop being shocking?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Then it was Brewster you loved...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I never loved anyone from that draft
didn’t hate them like you…didn’t love them either
In Romo we Trust
You loved Scott McKillop
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I actually think Jason Williams will see some real success at 4-3 OLB.
He can run and chase with the best of them and the position will allow him to not have to take on guards. Consider that after being picked up by the Panthers Jason Williams started two games and in those two games registered 14 tackles, 2 pass deflections, and a forced fumble. He unfortunately then got hurt, but I think he will be in the NFL for a while. This doesn’t validate us drafting him, but I could see him being pretty good for awhile for a different system.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
So he's Jamar Wall?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You could look at it that way maybe if you believe Wall could have success in another system.
However I find that doubtful since Wall is only on the practice squad of the Eagles and is on his third team in one year.
I suppose the common thread between them is that both were bad draft picks for the Cowboys and their system, but I believe there is a big difference between the two in the sense that I think Jason Williams has a place in the NFL whereas I doubt Wall does.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
That was my drift
A bad player for your system is still a bad pick, regardless of what round the pick is made.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Fair enough but I think Jason Williams doesn't deserve to be put in the same class as Jamar Wall hahaha.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Let's hope Bruce Carter isn't the next guy that I put in the same class as Williams
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Amen to that.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
thats my point
we put ourselves in a huge bind not preparing for Aikman’s departure, we need to draft a good QB in the first 2 rounds next year
Bruce Carter+Sean Lee=BRUCE LEE!!!!
by Archie Barberio on May 23, 2011 5:40 PM CDT reply actions
Good post 5B
I think 3 to 5 more years of very good play by Romo is realistic. Even if he can go on longer there is nothing wrong with grooming and developing another good young QB under him. Not sure if I would spend a first round pick on a young QB for the next couple of years but a second or third round pick could be a very wise investment. If Tony only has 3 to 5 years left then we have a young QB ready to come in and play at a high level, if Tony goes longer them we have someone we can trade for picks and then look at spending a first round pick on a QB to replace him.
Think about this...
if his magic is all about the ability to escape, and his athleticism declines like the data suggests (I can confirm that everything gets injured more easily and takes longer to heal after 30), then his window is even smaller than we think.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
The escapes are great for highlight film
but I think his real magic is great awareness of the pocket and being able to slide or move in the pocket to avoid pressure for an additional second or two.
I think that was what I was suggesting
…but the problem with that is twofold.
First, it means he takes big hits when there’s no play to be made and has to eat the ball. Second, his ability to avoid the rush will decline as he ages.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
All the more reason to improve the O-line (which we seemingly intend to do).
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Might be a bit premature to say that
…unless they land one of the better OG’s in Free Agency…wouldn’t you agree?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
However you spin it, taking a tackle in the first round certainly shows a commitment to improving the O-line.
But regardless, I too wouldn’t mind to see Bigg and his big contract get cut and replace him with the much more cost effective Justin Blalock. Then you can hopefully groom Arkin to replace Kosier.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
+1
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
I like that scenario too
I just don’t see one first round O-lineman as a philosophical shift. It’s more likely to be seen as a sort of “concession” from Jerry to Jason if that’s the only additive to what is clearly the offense’s sore spot.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Well I know you aren't high on Arkin, but taking him at the very least
shows that Dallas knows it needs new offensive lineman on its roster (besides just adding Smith). However you spin that, it certainly seems that Dallas wants to improve its O-line. Could they improve it more? Certainly and I hope they do. Still though, I think Dallas is certainly demonstrating that it wants to improve the offensive line.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Again, some would say that Brewster in 2009 reflected a shift
Many did, in fact.
I, however, did not.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Well I think a 1st, a 4th, and a 7th is much more of a shift than a 3rd.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Let's call it a 1st and a 4th
I never discuss 7th rounders…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Still more than a 3rd. A lot more.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Again, once is not a pattern
It’s not SUGGESTIVE of anything from a statistical standpoint.
O…M…G
I am starting to sound like FiTaT.
Keep sharp objects away from me!!!!!
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Never have I ever used the word 'pattern.'
I said Dallas has tried to improve its offensive line. There is no possible way to spin a 1st and a 4th used on offensive linemen any other way.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
You said it shows a commitment to improving the O-line
I disagree. It looks like a need pick gone wrong. I would, instead, say that if they replaced Bigg or Kosier as well, then you would be right.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Maybe if there was a free agency you would see something get accomplished on the guard front.
Of course, you are already docking them for something that they haven’t even gotten a chance to go through with.
But even without free agency, it is somewhat shocking to me that you can’t admit that three draft picks used on one unit show a team commitment towards improving a unit. That is just utterly confusing and dare I say Terry-esque. Was it as strong a commitment as you apparently wanted? Apparently not. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t still make a commitment towards improving the O-line.
I also find this argument a bit amusing since you have said time and time again how many holes this team has and yet you are now criticizing the Cowboys for not committing what, three out of their top four picks to O-line.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
My beef is which picks they invested
I’m a proponent of fixing the line. Call me crazy but 4th and 7th round picks are not blue chip investments. Rather, they are more akin to penny stocks or even pulls on the slot machine.
On free agency, I am not deriding them. I am simply saying that a real “commitment” requires real skin in the game.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
But a first absolutely is a blue chip investment
regardless of your personal feelings towards the player. And when you add that in with the 4th and 7th round picks the picture becomes much clearer.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Right, so that's one time in 20 years
Maybe the roulette wheel hit the right number. Maybe Jason got his one concession from Jerry on THAT pick.
The fact that Dallas avoided opportunities to add more highly-regarded talent in rounds 2 and 3 and really demonstrate a long-term commitment to building the O-line into a strong unit looks more like the Dallas War Room I know so well.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
More highly regarded talent
By who? Are they more talented than the players we got in the 2nd and 3rd round? Only time will tell, but apparently they weren’t higher on the ‘Boys’ overall board.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
By teams who have a proven track record for draft O-linemen with more success than Dallas?
Relative talent isn’t the question and as a result, you’ve veered away from the central point.
If you want to say Dallas has demonstrated a new “commitment” to improving the O-line, then you need more than Tyron Smith and some day 3 and 4 picks to sway me.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Way way more to sway me
Way more than a year or 2 picks, even in total.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Clarification
Way more than a year or two’s picks, even in total. Original typing came out wrong and ambiguous.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
So let me really get to the heart of this issue:
Do you consider a first round pick an attempt to improve a unit? I ask because that is what I am saying. And if you disagree, we are just going to have to agree to disagree.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
I think it could be
…but as a standalone pick, how could anyone truly judge what it is or isn’t.
For example, if Ryan Clady goes down with a career ending injury next season and Denver has the chance to draft a franchise LT in round 1, is that the same thing as a “commitment” (your word) to upgrading the unit or is it a need pick because you know you have nothing there?
See my point?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I can see what you are getting at
but consider that Dallas could make the argument that an offensive line improvement isn’t even that necessary. Our offense was still more than competent with the line we had last year. Really the horrid unit was the defense and because of that I wouldn’t have been horribly shocked if we put off O-line until maybe picking one or two guys up in FA. After all, that would be our normal MO.
But that is actually what we didn’t do. We did draft three offensive linemen all at different positions. To me, that can’t just be dismissed as a need pick. It is a clearly movement towards turning over and improving the O-line talent on this team.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
We're one season removed from having a highly regarded defense
We’re decades removed from having a highly regarded O-line (2007 notwithstanding).
They’ve drafted so many defensive players in the first round it is mind boggling.
Dallas can make a ton of arguments, but that doesn’t mean they would hold up to the test of reason.
I applaud the first round pick of an O-lineman. I think they goofed in not trading down and getting Castonzo and another OL in the second round.
That all said, I don’t put a ton of stake in day 3 and day 4 selections, especially when trying to evaluate strategic intentions. How many 4th-7th round picks make their respective NFL rosters? And what % turn out to be major contributors? My sense is that the percentages fall off of a cliff after round 3.
Is this worth calling on One Captain (America) Customer for help on?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Even if they had...
in rounds 2/3, or hell, through all 7, every pick, that doesn’t demonstrate a “long-term commitment”. It could just as likely be reactionary, granted an over-reactionary exteme, but reactionary nonetheless. Which is maintenace of the status quo, not a shift to a new paradigm or philosophy.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
That is true
…but I would also look to see what they do in Free Agency. A couple of key signings there could get me to change my tune because commitment is not limited to the draft.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It's one year
“...three draft picks used on one unit show a team commitment towards improving a unit. ”
Much as I’d like to see a shift away from the reactionary paradigm, one or two years’ effort ain’t gonna do it. Three’s the minimum for identifying a trend and that’s only the most superficial beginning evidence of commitment.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Why is a trend even necessary to show a commitment to improving a unit?
What if Dallas fixes their unit in one year? Are they still going to have to draft O-line high next year out of some commitment to O-line? Of course not. Every draft is about a commitment to improving your team and by them drafting like they did this year I think it is fair to say that part of that commitment was certainly slanted at improving their O-line.
This idea of a necessary pattern to show a commitment is ridiculous. It takes exactly one draft to show a desire (aka a commitment) to improve a unit. It’s the same reason I would feel comfortable the Cowboys have shown a commitment to improving their RB situation by drafting Demarco Murray.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Because picking Quincy Carter was not an indication that Dallas was committed to improving the QB spot
All it proves is Jerry and Lacewell were a pair of doofuses (doofi?) in the War Room.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It absolutely was a commitment to improving the QB spot.
Regardless of your opinion on Quincy personally, picking him there was done with the thought process that he would improve what the Cowboys had at that point. Isn’t that the entire nature of the draft? Using results to argue that Dallas didn’t make commitments in the past is faulty logic and doesn’t represent the idea of the draft.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Let me rephrase
Need picks are not commitments to improve. They are simply the fulfillment of a perceived need.
So no, a first round pick is not, simply on it own merits, what you think it is.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Well I think that is semantics.
Does a unit have to be above average for a draft pick towards it to be considered a commitment to improving that unit? If that’s the case I don’t see too many other teams making a whole ton of commitments to units. Because truly, anything below average or near average can be considered a need so consider the precedent that sets and the way it raises the bar for making a commitment.
And once again, if that is your conception of it, we can agree to disagree. I just have a different view.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
A commitment, at least for me...
means something more than a 1 for 22 scorecard.
They’ve drafted EVERY other position in the first round and finally made their way to OL.
The UNIT we’re discussing has more performance issues than a simple OT in the first round can resolve. So, my interpretation of a commitment is something broader and longer term.
It’s kinda like women, Creasy. Spending one night out of every 22 with your girlfriend isn’t a commitment.
IMO, it takes at least 2 nights out of every 22.
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Top 10 pick
Not only the first time in 22 years, but also the highest draft pick we have had in quite a while. IF that isn’t a sign of a specific decision to fix the OL I don’t know what is. You may have watned more and think 3rd rounder is better than 4th rounder Arkin, but that doesn’t mean it is the case for our draft boards. This wasn’t some status quo now on to OL to close the cycle and you know it. You may have wanted more, but it doesn’t mean they didn’t take a serious step to address OL.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
This.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
You said two different things
a specific decision to fix
and…
a serious step to address
Obviously, these are two wholly different things. That is, a step is not a decision.
I agree that they did the second. Not the first.
Sorry about the use of blockquotes.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
No trade down, no CB or draftee that was higher on draftnik boards (ie Fairley)…they made a decision to fix the OL with the best OT available, didn’t play any games, and drafted him at #9. In my mind, that is a clear decision to fix the line, not just BPA or biggest need (remember how many people assumed CB or DL)
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
This is not about semantics
One guy named Smith isn’t the “fix” I was looking for.
You could argue they made a decision to fix O, but not much more.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Circular argument
It was only Smith. I think Arkin in the 4th is also a decision to address the OL. I know, you would have liked a 2nd or 3rd rounder instead, but I do think taking Arkin in the 4th instead of a CB or Safety, etc. was another sign that OL is a priority they want to fix. And again, let’s wait to see if they don’t also use FA to address OL.
And while SMith may not be the total “fix” it is the biggest step I have seen in a long long time.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
So any selection on Day 2 on the OL would make you say Dallas is making a concerted effort to fix the line?
Does Shaun Chapas represent a decision to fix FB?
Do you think they’ve made a conscious decision NOT to fix the D-line based on the draft?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Again
You are breaking things up and not looking at the entire picture. 3 draft picks for the OL. Sure, one in the 7th, so you can discount it if you want, but they certainly could have gone another way with that late pick, but instead they decided to invest in an OL to groom. Again, in the 4th we hadn’t hit many “needs” that everyone thought, but we again went OL. Yes, getting a FB late in the draft is still a decision to invest in that position.
Now, no DL is an interesting question. I think part of it was because of how the draft and the DL clusters panned out compared to where we drafted, but we still could have gone for a guy like K. Ellis or Marvin Austin, but didn’t. To me, that shows that either Ryan likes what he already sees ont he roster and/or the FA available to sign. Bottom line, you can’t fix everything through one draft, but the position that they invested the most picks in was OL. To me, that shows some commitment. Sure, not llongterm yet, but decisions to address OL were clear to me.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Not to mention
Those DL i brought up don’t seem to be the “Right Kind of Guy” so in deciding on draft picks, it isn’t only what position to invest the picks, but also who is available high on your board at the time. So the draft alone can not be the measure of your intent to improve a specific position. But yes, to me Smith and Arkin and Nagy show a break from past trends and signs of a commitment, though certainly a decision to invest immediately to the future of our OL.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
If they had picked a bus boy in the 7th, I wouldn't spend 2 minutes thinking about it
Time’s too precious.
One day 1 pick. One day 2 pick that no one had on their radar.
I’m still left wanting.
Hoping Free Agency cures what ails me.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Blings, they made a specific decision to address the OL when the #9 pick came up. The choice, and therefore “decision”, went OL, not the Watt/Fairley/whatever/whoever. It was one decision, only one, but it was a decision. Not a commitment or anything else, but it was a decision on the pick being used to address the OL.
Wonder what influence a Castonzo pick at #9 would have had on the perspective and debate.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Let me challenge you just a bit
If you assume that the idea of “fix” equates to replacing Free and Colombo with Free and smith, then yes, you’d have an argument I would struggle to overcome.
On the other hand, if you assume that the “fix” requires something more than just replacing one OT, as I do, and frankly as I believe anyone who has seen this O-line play should, then no, there was no decision to FIX the line.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Tit-for-tat
The ‘fix" does require something more than merely replacing one OT or even 2 OTs. Much more. More than replacing both OG’s and the C, to boot. The “fix” goes beyond players.
No if’s, and’s, but’s or assumptions about it.
Now, let me challenge you a bit to find where I used “fix” relative to the “decision” to address our OL’s percieved deficiencies.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
When you used the word, "decision", I inferred that it was pulled verbatim from my blockquote
that said…
a specific decision to fix
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Inference? Dangerously close to Assumption. Understandable reasoning though. Incorrect, however, as I pulled “decision” from my head combined with the lexicon and use of the English language.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Usually, you are so measured in your choice of words
Hence, my inference.
Apologies.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Measured? Only voluminously
Your inferences on my interferences need no apologies. It is I who apologize for the wild goose chase.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Trend's necessary to show "commitment"
Fix the unit in one year, one fell swoop, fine. Whether it’s the next sequential year’s draft or not, using whatever resource-stream, there needs to be a consistent influx of resources in a balanced manner over an extended period of time to demonstrate “commitment”.
It does not require being in a “pattern”, but does require longevity. Using your “desire (aka commitment)”, I’ll lightheartedly refute that argument by saying next time you desire (lust) for a girl/guy, try and convince them your desire equates to the “commitment” some seek.
I’ve no doubt the Cowboys 2011 draft was, in part, concerned with addressing the OL challenges, but it’s as likely to be “reactionary” as “commitment” at this point. And if one looks at the modus operandi of these most recent 15 years, well, I’d be leaving the question open for now, till more evidence is in before claiming “commitment”.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Well clearly we just have different conceptions of what "commitment" entails.
And that is fine by me. We can agree to disagree.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Like I said
Let your girlfriend(s) know up front.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
No pattern?
How about the break of a pattern. For the first time in 22 years a 1st round OL. While one draft does not make a trend or pattern, it can certainly break a bad one.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
One event cannot be considered a break in the pattern
…especially one that’s 22 years in the making.
More empirical evidence required.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Certainly shows a shift though
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Hmmmm
A baseball player takes 22 at bat’s.
He goes hitless in his first 21 trips to the plate and then, in his 22nd plate appearance, lines a single up the middle.
Does that now suggest that he is going to have a batting average in line with the rest of the MLB players at his position? Does it mean he won’t go hitless in his next 21 trips to the plate?
Like I said before, there’s nowhere near enough to suggest anything other than it looks like the NEW pattern is a first-round O-lineman every 22 years.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
HAHA
Come on, the sun rises in the east for 22 years and then one day it doesn’t rise. Does this show a break in the trend?
You can think we didn’t invest int he future of our OL, but not only did we finally take a 1st OL but it was in the Top 10 as well. We then also drafted two more. In my mind, there was certainly an effort to improve our OL, more so than in the past. We willhave to see if it becomes a trend, but I am happy it happened.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
I think we DID invest in the O-line
I just don’t know if that means we’ll continue to do so or if this was a one-off.
I also believe we could have and should have done more.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Nope. One's a break.
Streaks are a pattern, winning, losing or any alternating or other series so desired as an example. One, out of sequence, breaks it.
Happens in weaving too. Basket-weaving, for example. Ask an athlete. Or weaving an argument.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Don’t most athletes major in basket weaving…talk about a double threat!
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Absolutely correct.
And only one way to tell if it’s a break or an anomaly.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Given said scenario, would it be indicative of a possible shift?
Or merely updating (upgrading?) parts? I say update.
Shift’ll be evidenced when a non-reactionary methodology for sustaining this team is ingrained in the organizational dynamic, not in picking players, be it over years, draft/FA/trade and the like.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
And IF Romo wins a ring he'll have the same number as Danny
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
If my aunt had nuts she'd be my uncle
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
If Romo wins one, are you scheduling those two for the transplant between the two?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
We were 6-10 last year and 1-5 with him as starter and finisher
We can worry about scheduling the elective surgery when there’s some reason to warrant it.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Sadly, neither am I...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh
Well, Played, my good man!!!
Well played indeed.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Because of the comparison, you've got to factor in White's broken wrist.
At age 34 that year, he was tearing it up, until injured.
I have to agree with others, I think Romo’s got a good 5 more years, where the dropoff should be minimal.
He will lose some physical skills, but should make up for that with better and better mental understanding and judgements. This is a guy with only 4 years of play under his belt, most good QB’s are 25-26-27 and already have that.
Another big injury of course changes that.
And, not disagreeing with the idea of getting a young QB to back up, as a matter of fact they really need to. But you’re using too much stats and too little eye in this one.
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
Well, let's set the record straight
Dallas made it to 3 consecutive NFC title games and lost them all. White lost his job in 1984 to Gary Hogeboom because of an inability to win the bling. He eventually won it back and got them to the playoffs in 1985, but lost early to the Rams. In ‘86, he got hurt and Dallas stunk it up without him (again, a tribute to Danny’s ability to carry that team). In 1987, White was clearly done and benched by Landry.
So, you’re right in that he played into 1986 at age 34, but the drop off was apparent (as the report shows), especially against good teams (there was no real parity back then).
White will be remembered as the guy who could not fill the shoes of the dodger. He couldn’t win the bling.
And that’s the first time anyone ever accused me of being to stat-heavy. I’m saving that comment for the record books.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not true
White lost his job in 84 due to temporary insanity of the great Tom Landry. Thank God he snapped out of it eventually.
White never lead the Cowboys to a SB because of one reason and one reason only….his defenses sucked. Not his fault.
If Staubach had those defenses, he wouldn’t have acquired the two rings he currently possesses either.
In Romo we Trust
So you're saying white was every bit as good as Staubach?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
no, I'm saying he was definitely good enough to be a SB winning qb
unfortunately for him though, SB winning qbs always have really good defenses like Staubach did.
In Romo we Trust
So was Roger
Based on your earlier comment, you must see them as equals in that regard.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not equals, but not huge difference in play either
Roger was a better playmaker for sure but White could throw the rock around as well as anyone.
Bottom line is you give way too much credit and blame regarding the qb’s influence on a game.
Football is a team game…qbs don’t win or lose the games…they win and lose as a team
In Romo we Trust
Funny how no TEAMS are in the HOF
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Holy Crap, maybe the end is coming. I have to agree with Terry.
At least on his first post above.
The fact that Hogeboom took over is irrelevant, it was stupidy desperate.
Not winning, irrelevant, White had no D.
Look up his stats the year he broke his wrist and tell me he was done. He was lighting it up that year.
White was no Rosger S. But he’s not a good example for a QB getting old.
Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, isn't it both? Realist Larry, 2009
by Realist Larry on May 25, 2011 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions
I went back and looked at that start before Banks took him out
…they beat a bunch of poor teams in that string. Among them, St. Louis twice (they ended 4-11-1) and Philly (5-10). They actually beat the Giants, who went on to win the Super Bowl, in game 1, but got torched by the Broncos, who won the AFC.
Danny was playing like Danny, but he wasn’t having his best year and as such, I go back to what kb said; decline does not mean suck.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
guarantee Romo will have his best year of his career
sometime over the next 5 years…..that is no decline
In Romo we Trust
And what has you making that guarantee?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
he has constantly improved each and every year
He doesn’t have as much wear on the tires as other guys. His team is getting better(hopefully) He is playing smarter(drop in turnovers) and still can Houdini a play.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
No
Incorrect.
No one would say he improved last year. His team was 1-5 and his offense was not impressive.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
really?!
Wins are not just on the QB. Plus his WRs dropped a ton of balls in their hands and he no ol. He did really well given the circumstances. Romo was the only reason the team was closing to winning any of those games.
Take your hater glasses off
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
Oh here we go...
the hater thing again? really?
That’s a loser comment that I wouldn’t normally expect from you. Pity.
He led a 1-5 team into last place. His numbers weren’t better than the first 6 starts he had the year before (comparing year-over-year performance) and your apologist BS about receivers dropping this ball or that ball is laughable. No one will ever remember that other than Dallas homers.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
but you have to look at the whole picture
the QB is only one part. This is where the eye ball test ranks above stats.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
I do
I think I have made that abundantly clear when I have said, repeatedly, that Romo gives me hope.
I think Romo is the kind of QB that could absolutely bring a bling to Dallas.
But that doesn’t change the fact that he is lagging behind his peers when it comes to how he’ll be remembered (much like Danny White) when the book on Romo is closed.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
his career numbers say you're wrong
Top 5 all time qb rating….how is that lagging behind?
In Romo we Trust
Again, that's got more to do with rule changes than anything else
It’s the ability to perform at a high level over an extended period of time that matters.
Those volume #’s are what most people look at.
Why is that hard for you to accept?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
“Why is that hard for you to accept?”
You’re joking, right? Look who you’re asking. Look at his tagline. It’s like that thing on the bills. There ain’t no logic to it. It’s a nice closed-circle, self-supporting faith thing. You believe because you have faith, you have faith because you believe. In Romo.
Fallaciousness aside.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
How do you know that for sure?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Danny White didn’t play against the Broncos in 1986. Steve Pelluer did.
In 1986 White was playing very well before Banks got to him.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 6, 2011 6:41 AM CDT up reply actions
I believe there's a fundamental flaw in that study
and that flaw is an underlying issue every time we talk about the longevity of athletes in particular and people in general. The flaw is that we are looking at longevity as a static model, when in fact it is dynamic. We are effectively using data from the past to predict the future but are not taking into account the dynamic nature of the data set.
Look at the chart of average life expectancy on the right. In 1980, average life expectancy was around 70 years. Using a static model from 1980, we would have predicted life expectancy to remain at around 70 for the next twenty years, when in fact it increased to around 77 years. And it is bound to increase further.
I believe a similar dynamic model needs to be applied to quarterbacks. Just look at the amount of rules that have been put in place in the last thirty years to protect the QB, the improvement in a QBs strength and conditioning program, medical advances, you name it. All of that is bound to make the ‘lifetime’ of a QB much more dynamic.
So just because something was true in the past doesn’t make it true now. I’m not all disputing that the physical performance peak for an athlete is somewhere in his mid to late 20’s, I just think we are underestimating how far athletes today, and the QB position in particular, can stretch that peak.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 2:47 AM CDT reply actions
+!
Just look at the amount of rules that have been put in place in the last thirty years to protect the QB, the improvement in a QBs strength and conditioning program, medical advances, you name it. All of that is bound to make the ‘lifetime’ of a QB much more dynamic.
So just because something was true in the past doesn’t make it true now.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
PS you excited about that Captain America movie? I saw the preview during Thor and it actually seemed like it could be decent.
When does Avengers come out?
I actually really liked Thor. Not as good as the first Ironman, but still good.
Hulk ranks far behind…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
which one?
hulk movies that is? I thought the second one was actually pretty good
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 24, 2011 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Both
Thor was better than both Hulks.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
haven't seen Thor yet
so I can’t judge…but IronMan #1 was awesome…really want to see #2….
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 24, 2011 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions
#1 is better, but #2 is good too
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Only hulj with ed norton is the canon.one made by marvel studious.
I thought hulk was the best too bad marvel and norton couldn’t get along. Avengers comes out May 2012 with.TDKR right behind it. Surely will be an epic year but can it top Harry potter this year? I say harry breaks ALLL records.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
by thebigham on May 24, 2011 8:04 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Hmmmm
Jeff George stillpublicly wonders why no NFL team calls on him to play QB for them.
I believe that, in his own mind, he believes he can play. He MAY be right. The question is whether or not he’d be a better option, with his diminished athletic ability, than a Ryan Fitzpatrick, who will probably never be half the QB that George was in terms of his athletic prime.
I think the rules do protect QB’s from serious injury. But injuries like Danny’s broken wrist, which came on an everyday hit by Carl Banks, and Romo’s hit against the Giants, still happen. So while there may be some protective impact, I think the idea of injury to a QB remains a constant concern for anyone playing the position.
The thing about Romo is that he hasn’t proven himself to be as immune to the injury bug as his elite contemporaries like Brady (who only had the knee), Favre (who either faked it all or was just one tough son of a gun) and Peyton (who just seldom gets hurt).
To think that Romo has 5 more highly productive years in him given his injury track record seems more like wishful thinking than anything else.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Know what I just realized?
Both Danny and Tony got taken out by hits from NYG defenders.
They share more than I considered…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Yippee! 1-15 upcoming, we draft the next Troy and voilà
Let’s see, 1989-1986=3, yep, 3 years, should be just about right. Makes our next SB, what, 6-7 years out.
Then again, there’s that OCC “So just because something was true in the past doesn’t make it true now” stuff to be considered.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
6-10 is equidistant to 1-15 and 15-1
Which is a more likely outcome for this team?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
In what universe is 6 equidistant to 1 and 15?
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
It was metaphorical
In the NFL, you’re likely to go from zero to hero just as likely as you are to go from hero to zero.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Dang! Now I’ve gotta go looking for a metaphorical font.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions
How's that working out for you?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Terry's? That way Tony plays 15 more years.
Note the use… awww, screw it
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
by tanstaafl on May 24, 2011 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
he doesn't have a injury track record
two broken bones in 5 years isn’t a track record.
He’ll be the Cowboys starter, and a good one, for at least 5 years…take that to the bank.
In Romo we Trust
It is when compared to Eli, Rivers and others...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
The other thing I was thinking was that the study was published in 2010
…with references pulled as late as 2009 from Scouts Inc and Pro Football Reference. I would think the trends you speak of are already somewhat embedded in the data because they were examining performances of players from beginning to end. So Otto Graham’s numbers were compared to Kurt Warner’s, right?
Any truism that you could say effects the “now” would have factored into their research and data trends, no?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Not sure
I only read the article you linked to, nothing more. They did say that they looked at the 50 leading all-time rushers for their RB data. That list (and this list is probably a close approximation) goes back all the way to Jim Brown, and only about half the players were active within the last ten years. Of course, the authors may have developed a predictive model based on that data, but I’d bet they didn’t, because there’d be way too many factors that needed to be taken into account, like increasing size and speed of defenders, artificial turf, protective gear, etc. etc.
I actually believe the ‘lifespan’ of the modern day running back has decreased versus 20 or 30 years ago, but I’m too lazy to run the numbers.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
Don't look at me
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Although...
here’s a little more from Fein and how he went about his research. Feel free to point out flaws.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Eeeeeewwww, Bleacher Report!

Well, at least it didn’t have a slide show. His methodology overall is sound, but he assumes a static model. This is particularly disturbing when you consider that one of the key quarterback measurables, the passer rating, has shown exactly that dynamism.
Consider the evolution of the league wide passer rating in the graph on the right which I so eloquently described in this post here. Now this graph is obviously due in large part to the rule changes implemented by the NFL benefiting the passing game. But why shouldn’t a similar graph exist showing e.g. the increased athletic prowess of QBs as they age?
Anyway, I’m already tired of this argument as I’m repeating myself, and it wasn’t directed at you anyway.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Screw that Fein guy!
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
This is what I was trying to think of how to say but eventually gave up because I couldn't put it together eloquently.
Thank you so much for expressing it better than I could have hoped to. Also, how do you put a chart like that in your text for a comment?
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
when you insert a picture you usually get a code like this:
img src=“http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/369909/Passer_Rating.jpg”/>
Change it as follows and the picture hangs on the right, with the text flowing around the picture:
img src=“http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/369909/Passer_Rating.jpg” align=“right”/>
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Pearls of Wisdom
Good to know. It may save you some future editing.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Outstanding!!!
BTW, what Romo post would be complete without a picture of his bride-to-be?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Thanks for the info!!!
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Romo will be fine for a while.
As long as he’s healthy, we have at least another 3 years of prime production, and then probably another two of good production. I wouldn’t worry about drafting a QB for at least the next 2 years. After that I think we are in that draft window.
There is no need to take a huge risk by drafting a QB in the first round right now when we already have a good one. If somehow we ended up picking in the top 5 and someone(Luck) was there that was the best prospect in a long time, then maybe.
I don’t see any way Jerry and Jason draft a QB anytime soon. The only time teams take QB’s in the first or second round is when they don’t have a good one(barring career threatening injury circumstances). Just like Jerry said when asked about Tebow, why would he draft someone he can’t get on the field? What if Tony plays great for the next 6 years? Are you going to let a 1st/2nd rounder sit on the bench his entire rookie contract?
by honkytonkbaseball on May 24, 2011 6:48 AM CDT reply actions
I think Ted Thompson just won a Super Bowl by doing otherwise...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not true, if Favre was 31, no way they draft Rodgers
Favre was over 35 though, big difference.
In Romo we Trust
You missed the point
Favre was still playing well and they drafted a QB in round 1 when they had other pressing needs. The safe bet is that they picked AR because he had special qualities they wanted in their QB and refused to pass them up.
Thompson was visionary in that regard.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
As was Jerry Jones
when he drafted Steve Walsh with a first round pick in the supplemental draft right after taking Aikman with a first round pick?
Aaahh, the benefit of hindsight.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 24, 2011 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, that was completely different
That was Jimmy not sold on anything or anyone but his Miami warriors.
It was stupid.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Probably not, but Favre never missed a game
Tony’s missed more games than his contemporaries.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Relative to total games played? Yes he has...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You're flat out wrong Bling and so is Fein
31 is not old at all for a qb, it’s actually prime age for very good qbs. Look at all the really good qbs throughout history, and Romo is certainly a very good qb, they all peaked in their 30s and played their very best football in those years. Just look at what Manning, Brady and Brees are doing….all in their 30s.
Romo is entering the prime of his career, especially considering that he didn’t start until he was 26, so there is plenty of tread left on him.
And if you’re going to name Rivers as an elite qb for great stats and consistency, you definitely have to name Romo as an elite qb as well since his numbers and consistency is just as impressive as Rivers.
In the last few weeks, both Kurt Warner and Staubach said Romo was elite…..I definitely agree.
In Romo we Trust
Romo vs. Rivers
Rivers has surpassed 100QB rating several times (with no running game) while Romo never has. While many stats are similar (Romo is very good, but not yet elite) there are some glaring differences.
Romo missed 3 games in ’08 and 10 games in ’10 – 13 games in 3 years.
Rivers has not missed a game since becoming a starter in ’06.
Romo has thrown 118 TDs and 62 INTs
Rivers has thrown 136 TDs and 58 INTs
Romo is very good, but let’s not call him elite just yet. In fact, while I think Rivers is slightly better at this point, I don’t consider him elite yet either…but he is closer.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
rivers seems pretty elite to me
i think he’s better than pig ben who is often considered elite in a heartbeat, i have always thought he has been overrated since his performace as a rookie, people seem to wet his pants about his ability to extend plays and stuff but i think romo is better in that departament, he has two rings because of a great defense, he’s cleary wasn’t a leader, so what’s up with people buying that sh*t about him being elite?
For the record
Even with his SB rings, I don’t consider Ben R elite. In fact, I think the term is used too often. Yes, he, Romo and Rivers are really good, but there are only a few elite QBs in this league – at this point – Payton, Brees, and Brady.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Certainly close (closer than both Romo and Rivers) in my opinion
But I need more that 2 year sample size to call someone elite. If he has a third similar season, I would likely agree with you.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
My bad
My numbers are off. I wouldn’t call him elite after 3 seasons, but one mroe and he is HAHAHA.
But yes, he is on the verge in my book, but not there yet. Still Top 5 QB in the league though.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
In my book top 5 is elite
considering there are 32 of them.
How is top 15% not elite?
In Romo we Trust
It's semantics
But in my opinion elite means the best of the best. Top 10% is even a bit much, but given that means 3 players that’s fine. Again, I am not saying Top 5 QBs aren’t very good, but my personal definition of elite is different than yours.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
yeah elite is held by few and wanted by many
I say manning and brady but after last year Rodgers is moving in because brady and manning have to past the torch
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
Three AFC Titles and 2 Blings in 6 years and he's not as good as Brees?
I’m sorry, but that’s just nonsense.
I don’t like the guy but I can’t allow that to devalue his play on the field and unfortunately, I think you’ve allowed who you like to intrude on who you know to be better.
He’s won them big games that no other QB could have won.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Ben
He does step up to win big games, I’ll give him that.
But he has a slightly worse completion % than both Romo and Rivers, far worse TD to INT ratio (144 to 86) and he has a worse ANY/A (adjusted net yards per pass) than both Romo and Rivers.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
But I can't devalue him for that
They rely more on running and defense than Dallas does. It’s like discounting Aikman because he didn’t have Steve Young-like numbers.
Ben does what his team needs him to do to win big games. Isn’t that the true measure of greatness for the game’s most important position?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Not about running more than passing
I am talking about % of completions, adjusted yards/pass, and TD/INT ration. Doesn’t matter if you only throw 20 times a game, those stats show how good you were while passing. I will certainly devalue him for that. He is good, but not elite in my book.
In my opinion, the Saints would never have won the SB without Brees (same goes for the Colts) but I think Romo and Rivers would have won with that Steelers team (defense specifically) and perhaps even with a worse QB at the helm. We can certainly disagree, but just winning big games does not make one elite – Trent Dilfer won some big games for Baltimore and is a great analysts, an elite QB he is not.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Not true
If you’re a passing team, you hone your passing skills and become a team who relies on higher completion percentages to be successful on offense.
It’s the same argument, assuming you accept it, that Garrett uses to deflect the criticisms of his play calling (aka not running the ball) while Winnie was coach.
He said it was because they didn’t practice it. They seldom practiced in pads, so his play-calling in practice leaned heavily toward Romo and the aerial attack. I’m not sure if I believe him about the why, but I know he’s right about the what. If you don’t practice it, you won’t be EFFECTIVE at it…and that what ANYPA and TD/INT ratios are all about.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Roethlisberger never won a game in his life
He rides the coat tails of his amazing defense…when they’re not playing up to par he’s an average qb at best.
In Romo we Trust
That's typical self-contradiction
You’ve said over and over and over that Romo will win Super Bowls once he has a better O-line and a great defense.
You won’t give Ben the same regard?
Terry, you ARE one of a kind.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
No because you're comparing apples with oranges
Cowboys don’t need to have an amazing defense like the Steelers to win SBs, they just have to be pretty good. So far they’ve been lousy.
Romo puts up more points than Reothlisberger and better numbers….flat out he’s simply more productive, but the lack of defensive help causes team failures, unlike with Roethlisberger.
In Romo we Trust
So one QB is an apple and the other QB is an orange?
How do they handle that when it comes to the HOF?
Is there one section for Apple QB’s and one for Orange ones?
Which fruit is Aikman?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
no, one team is an apple, the other an orange
Their team dynamics and the way they play the game are totally different.
Simply put the Steelers win because of their defense and all Roethlisbegrer simply has to do is score a minimal amount of points to have success.
On the other hand, the Cowboys are an offensive team and has to rely on Romo and the offense much more because their defense is bad.
If both qbs played for the other, Cowboys wouldn’t have been as successful and Romo would own at least 2 rings at this point, maybe more.
In Romo we Trust
I have no idea how you know this to be true
If both qbs played for the other, Cowboys wouldn’t have been as successful and Romo would own at least 2 rings at this point, maybe more.
The problem for both of us is that you don’t either.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Thanks for reaffirming my point about your statements not equating with arguments
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You are reaching
I don’t care how often you run in a game, the QB will practice every route, every throw. I don’t remember Garrett ever saying they didn’t practice running the ball enough and thus weren’t good at it. Physical practice in pads is different. In any case, whether due to the system or not, Ben’s effeciency isn’t elite.
Now Aikman, was on a run heavy offense and still has better effeciency stats than Ben. Aikman was elite.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
This is where you miss the point
I don’t care how often you run in a game, the QB will practice every route, every throw.
While true, you need to complete the sentence.
They’ll practice every route, every throw, just not as much.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Offseason OTAs, Camps, Practices, staying late with WRs…I just don’t see the fewer throwing reps considerably more or something an elite QB can’t overcome.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Not just about the QB, Keg
Passing is all about timing and it needs far more repetition than running.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
yeah i was just throwing an example
you’ right , there a re to many elite QB’s, the thing is nobody has specific parameters to say who is elite and who’s not. being a little bit less demanding i would add rivers and rodgers to your list, but i think the names you put on the table are fair accurate
No doubt, personal definition of elite is all about semantics, just describing my own.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
they are both close enough
that if you’re going to call one elite you gotta include the other as well…..no significant differences between the two productivity speaking.
In Romo we Trust
Again, they are close
But I do think the TD-INT ratio and missed games are pretty signigicant differences between the two.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
TD-INT ratio is very close
and the missed games is a non-factor since Romo’s injuries were the type any athlete could suffer… you gonna down grade Brady because he missed the entire 2008 season??
Didn’t think so
In Romo we Trust
Welll
The ratio is significant in my book, and Tom Brady had one injury in 9 years…missed games are important. A QB will not be elite if his team can’t rely on him as often
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Brady has a bunch of blings, try again
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
So did Aikman
…yet you don’t downgrade him relative to his peers.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I'm not downgrading Brady either
I’m just not judging Brady as a qb simply based on the number of blings like you do.
In Romo we Trust
How about his career yards and TD's?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
total yards and TDs are relative
I’d rather look at the important stats like completion % and yards per attempt.
In Romo we Trust
Who cares what YOU would rather look at?
When did the HOF or all-time great QB conversation become about “what Terry would rather look at”?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
you can't really hold the injuries against Romo though
Romo missed 3 games in ’08 and 10 games in ’10 – 13 games in 3 years.
the three in ‘08 was he hit his hand on a Cardinal player’s helmet as he through the ball and of course the Collorbaone was the result of a unpicked up blitzer….
neither one of those are romo’s fault, just bad luck….
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 24, 2011 4:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Sure
Like I said to Bling, I don’t think Romo is injury prone, but in my book you aren’t an elite QB if you miss 13 games in 3 years – your fault or not.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
my point is
Dallas can count on Romo….in fact I do believe that Romo could have played in the final two games last year, but JG “shut him down” for the season because Kitna was doing so good….
Bear in mind that I may be wrong on that, and if I am then disregard this that part…..
The key was that if not for two “fluke” injuries, Romo would have played in every game. Which is why I say you can’t hold the “missed games” against Romo in comparing him to Rivers….
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 24, 2011 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions
And herein lies his statistical problem
His career #‘s will fall short of his peer group because of the missed time. Unless he has the blings to even the score, so to speak, he won’t be viewed differently than White is today.
Whenyou ask most non-cowboys fans about Romo, they still remember him because of the botched snap more than anything else.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not true
His qb rating is already very high…4rd all time as a matter of fact.
If that isn’t elite, I don’t know what is.
BTW, most non Cowboys fans hate the Cowboys so of course their opinion of Romo will be bad just like it is of almost all other Cowboys.
In Romo we Trust
The cross our $67 million dollar QB has to bear
I don’t feel sorry for him.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
He missed 27% of his starts
Not his fault by any stretch…in fact, I blame the front office for not finding better protectors and demanding a better running game to support him.
But still, history won’t care.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
+1
Though even the lack of career sum stats won’t dissuade most from recognizing his (still improving) impressive efficiency stats…though blings of course carry their own shine
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
As they should
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
In your case, Shinola
As the two are often confused, idiomatically.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Argue that with the Hall of Fame voters
…however, I am quite sure you’ll get support in places like Philadelphia.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
HOF voters would probably agree with me
since guys like Fouts and Marino are in the HOF and a multiple SB winner like Plunkett isn’t.
In Romo we Trust
Fouts' and Marino's career numbers dwarfed those of their peers
Romo’s don’t.
So you think HOF voters have Romo as a likely inductee?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
If he keeps up this pace?
Yeah, I think so…will certainly be on their radar and discussions.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
I disagree completely
He isn’t likely to make up ground on his contemporaries.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
That's silly, Terry
He has to because the HOF voters have to juxtapose candidates with their peers. It is highly compeititive and there is history that clearly suggests what it takes to get in.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
look at young
He got in because he was an extremely efficient qb like….no different….he would have still got in without a ring
In Romo we Trust
Facts Time
Drew Bledsoe played for a similar number of seasons as Young.
Drew has 19 more TD passes and 11,000 more passing yards.
How about Vinny Testaverde? He has 42 more TD’s than Young and 13,000 more yards.
Neither Vinny nor Drew are in the Hall but you think a guy who ranks lower on the all-time list of volume metrics, which we know weigh heavily in HOF voting, would leapfrog them and many others who rank higher than him.
Why?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Putting my money on Dead Silence
With a Shake-your-head-What?! covering-bet.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Would you agree that if there were never another football season and the NFL had to rank the QB's currently playing, he'd be well down the list of consideration for HOF relative to his peers?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
As usual, my answer to you is: NO
You’re wrong and your affinity for Romo has overtaken your common sense.
And if you’re going to name Rivers as an elite qb for great stats and consistency, you definitely have to name Romo as an elite qb as well since his numbers and consistency is just as impressive as Rivers.
Both became starters in 2006. Romo’s didn’t start until partway into the 2006 season.
Over that time, Rivers has not missed a single regular season start (hence my argument about Romo’s propensity to miss time from injury).
Romo as a starter is 39-22 with a .639 winning percentage over that span.
Rivers is 55-25 with a .688 winning percentage. That equates to Rivers having 3 more losses and 16 more wins.
Rivers has over 3,000 more passing yards and 18 more TD’s over that period.
Rivers is also a year and a half younger than Romo.
If you play the numbers out, Tony looks like he’s got a better argument against Eli. But even Eli has 6,000 more passing yards and 38 more TD’s than Romo and Romo is the elder of the two. The big difference between them, again, will always be the bling unless Tony finds a way to win at least one.
Romo’s durability is one of the big question marks in comparing him with his peers in the second group of QB’s. Strictly speaking, if Romo misses any more significant time due to injury, he won’t be looked upon all that favorably when it comes to ranking the QB’s of this era.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Injury concerns
While Rivers does have an incredible Favresque streak brewing with no missed starts, and I agree with most of what you said, I don’t think Romo should be considered injury prone or risk. He has missed games due to 2 injuries in 4 and a half seasons, not too shabby. While the last one was serious and he missed 10 games due to it, he had only missed 3 games prior to that. I don’t think we should consider Romo injury plagued nor at significant risk – especially with an improved OL.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Careful
“…especially with an improved OL”
Chickens, Keg. They’re just eggs right now.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Yup
…and only one egg worth talking about.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
The goose-egg we have in SB appearances in the past 15 years (+counting).
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
HAHAHA
Laugh/cry quote of the day
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
It is what it is
Fewer games = fewer attempts = fewer completions, yards and TD’s.
If he doesn’t win a bling, his career numbers, because of his late start in the NFL, his age and his missed time will make his career numbers look even more pedestrian over time.
That was my point relative to injuries.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
good point 5blings
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
Thanks...I thought so too
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
wrong bling
those numbers aren’t significant enough to differentiate the two at all…..very bad analysis on your part.
In Romo we Trust
Extrapolate
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Just look at their numbers
there isn’t much separating the two to say one is in another class than the other. And the injury argument is lame…you going to say Manning is better than Brady because he missed more games in his career??
Lame
In Romo we Trust
Manning's career numbers will be tops all time if he can go three more years
Who knows if he can?
But the point is that his numbers look very average but Rivers has had more prolific seasons.
Look at the HOF. They look at a player’s impact in terms of two things. How much did they win and how prolific were they relative to their peers.
If both of their careers ended today, and you had to pick one for the Hall, who would it be?
I’m sorry, but your Romolove won’t triumph over logic here.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Romo's numbers are anything but average
Look at his qb rating, it’s top 5 all time…how is that average??
I’d take Romo of course
In Romo we Trust
Yards, TD's, wins, blings
Average.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
His efficiency stats are nowhere near average.
I believe his YPA is top-5 of all-time. And you can see how that might be important since that means not too many QBs get more yards every time the ball leaves their hands.
Now, you could argue that that might be a sign of the times. And to a large extent I would agree with you (although in a weird twist the three top leaders in the this category are Otto Graham, Sid Luckman, and Norm Van Brocklin). However, to put this in better context, consider that his career yards per attempt of 8.0 ties him at #4 with Ben Rothelisberger and Philip Rivers. It also puts him slightly above Rodgers, Manning, and it puts him significantly higher than Drew Brees and Tom Brady.
So, what is the take-away here? It is not that Tony is necessarily the best QB out of all these guys. I love Tony but even I would profess to rather have Rivers or Rodgers right now. However, the takeaway is that his stats, when truly looked at, are not average. They just aren’t. This isn’t me playing with overly complicated statistics or anything, but rather just goes to show that Tony has statistically done very well when he has been on the field. Volume stats are never going to give you the best and most contextual answer as far as level of play on the field. There is no better indicator of that then Brett Favre.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
The HOF doesn't look at ANYPA
You do.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Where did I say that I was even concerned with the HOF?
Was that my point in writing that? You seem to be trying to argue something with me that I am not arguing.
You said that Tony’s whole body of work (and you went so far as to include yards, which is a stat) is average. As I have shown, that is not the case.
And furthermore, I could care less with who or what looks at ANYPA. It doesn’t change the way that it is an effective way to measure QB performance. Keep sticking to what the HOF voters consider important. I am sure Peter King will never lead you astray.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
I am deeply offended by this entire thread
and the callous way in which ANPY/A, the mother of all passing stats, is being publicly disparaged.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 26, 2011 1:00 AM CDT up reply actions
New rule: if the stat has more than 5 syllables, it is gonna be disparaged
OCC, why don’t the other writers on BTB comment on fan posts?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I assume it'd be like fraternization
Like how officers can’t mingle with enlisted men.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
Wow
…like Animal Farm.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Assumption introduces error
Then again, OCC’s anomalous. As is rab, KD,…
Which kinda blows the anomaly outta the water. Sorry, OCC, you’re Only Common Comrade.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
They don't?
I’m surprised by that. Dave doesn’t comment a lot anywhere, but that’s because he’s The Man, here and at SB Nation NFL. Rabble and KD do comment here though, but maybe not as much as they used to.
I obviously can only speak for myself, but sometimes it’s simply a matter of available time. I’ve written 218 front page posts so far this year. That’s an average of almost exactly 1.5 per day. I simply do not have the time to follow every post and every thread all the way to the end – but I do read every fanpost, and edit almost every fanpost as well.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 26, 2011 2:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Still, I think it would enhance the experience for the posters
…if the writers were more “present”? Just a thought.
Also, I am remiss in not thanking you publicly for your formatting help.
My garbage comes out looking like a professional work every time you’re done with it.
Thank you now, and in the future, for all of your help.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You’re more than welcome, now, and in the future.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 26, 2011 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions
we do!
Just not as fanatically as O.C.C., who is just generally more awesome on all accounts!
by rabblerousr on May 28, 2011 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Hmmmm
I’d like some data on the subject before I agree or not. I do know that posters really enjoy when their topics spur interactions with the site contributors.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
This is true
I need to talk to Dave about changing my name to Captain Awesome.
by One.Cool.Customer on May 29, 2011 8:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Interesting story that I shared with Tony this weekend
In 2006, I was at training camp and King was there observing. As he was leaving, I yelled over to him, “Peter, who looked good today?”
He didn’t hear me all that well and said, “thanks!”
After I repeated my question, he said, “oh! Romo!!!”
And look what happened that season.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I am surprised he didn't tell you which coffee to get
or give you some travel tips. Or perhaps he could have told you what he possibly, maybe thinks what might happen.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Sounds like you're a big fan
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Haha I can't say that I am.
I think he is valuable for inside information because people do talk to him, but I think that is about all he really offers. I actually think that his take on the game leaves a lot to be desired. And because of that, it saddens me that he gets to vote on the HOF.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
No they don't.
I thoroughly enjoy their take-downs. Not only do they touch on his lack of actual football knowledge, they rightfully point out how naive and ignorant he can often be.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
i havent laughed so hard
since the dan snyder mystery interview on sirus radio haha
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
Yeah I loved that one as well.
I still can’t believe that he stole a story and then when it fell through he felt it appropriate to blame it on the guy he stole it from. Hilarious and I wouldn’t expect anything less from King.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
KSK? You've piqued my interest,
and now I want to read some King bashing.
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions
KSK = Kissing Suzy Kolber for those who don't know.
It is a wonderful football humor blog that posts a takedown of King’s articles every week. Some are better than other but they do a good job showing some of the issues that run rampant in King’s articles.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
TKS = Thanks.
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions
King might've...
Meant it in an “even King’s going to be weeping sorrowfully this weekend” kinda way, saying Tony “looked good” to him.
Like all them gals that ain’t at the altar.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
You have to view his stats in terms of total mass too, don't you?
As players age and, as we’ve seen, decline statistically relative to their athletic peaks, isn’t it safe to assume that his numbers from here on out (including the efficiency metrics you cite) will decline as well?
He may be in a no-win situation.
If he plays 3-4 more seasons, his statistical YPA performance is likely to decline as are all of his numbers which will erode the argument you’re making which is based upon the snapshot you’re looking at.
If he only plays two more years, his body of work is arguably too insignificant in a ranking with is peers.
Unless…he wins a bling.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
The fact is that you said he performs average statistically.
Regardless of whether he declines in the future is irrelevant to the point that, as of now, when he has played he has not been average. I am not the one making wild general statements here and yet you seem to be arguing back to me as if I just said that Tony Romo was a top-five QB of all-time. I believe I made it very clear that that is not how I feel.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Fair enough
…but efficiency metrics are obscure. Yards, TD’s and blings Are the standard for retrospective views of how good a QB was once his career ends.
In regard to those stats, he is average.
That is my central point.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Fair.
I would agree that, while I find it somewhat misguided, HOF voters do seem to latch on to the stuff you pointed to.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Would you also agree that efficiency scores are improving overall due to rule changes?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I actually agreed with that up above in my first comment.
But as I point out there as well, even if you restrict your analysis to QBs of this recent era, his YPA still is significantly higher than Brees and Manning, barely higher than Rodgers and tied with Rivers and Rothlisberger.
And once again, I don’t think YPA is so concretely important that it alone shows the order in which QBs should be ranked. I do though think that it is significant enough to disprove any notion that Tony’s play in the NFL has been average.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
His play is different than his production
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You are going to have to explain this one.
Because even though I don’t profess production to be the end-all (or where the conversation has to end) it certainly cannot be said that what he does on the field and what numbers he puts up are not tied together intricately.
Double negatives are fun.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Aikman versus Young
Aikman was never going to achieve the kind of prolific numbers that Young was, but Aikman was generally viewed as the better QB.
Using modern day comparisons, if football ended today, Big Ben would be a HOF’er and Rivers would not.
Personally, I like Rivers better, but Ben has the big game success on his side, in many of which he made huge plays to propel his team to victory.
Now, if Ben had the same amount of postseason success as Rivers has had, there would be no doubt who the better QB is and who is more likely to be mentioned in that all-time great conversation.
I don’t care if you make 15 passes per game or 50, it’s the overall outcomes that matter. Ben has more positive game outcomes and it will be inferred that he made more of his opportunities than other pass-happy guys who couldn’t get a bling. Like it or not.
The only way Rivers gets into the conversation without a bling is continued ultra-high statistical performance over a more extended period.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Well the point here is that regardless of outcomes
Tony’s play (which is linked to his production) has been pretty darn good in the big picture. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t have been better in certain spots, but even considering that, Tony has been considerably above average in play and production. And most importantly, on an outcome level, I believe his level of play is good enough to win a Super Bowl.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
I agree his play is above average
But would you then concede that if you look at volume stats relative to his peers, coupled with his age and missed time, he is under the gun to win a bling if he wants to be in that all-time great conversation down the road?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Yes.
The missed time absolutely hurts him and while I don’t find volume stats perfect, the HOF does put a lot of stock in them. I would agree that Romo needs to win a Super Bowl to get in serious HOF contention down the road.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Then I guess we'll just have to agree to agree
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Plenty of people
Notice and follow the “simple” effeciency stats as well. Completion %, TD to INT ratio, or even the bad effeciency stats like QB rating.
Even HOF voters are smart enough to take these things into consideration and not just sum stats…though they are dumb enough to let personal bias affect their voting, so who knows.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Let me be as clear as I can be
Tony is 31 and has 39 wins under his belt.
Rivers has 55 and Eli has 60 and a bling. And, as if that wasn’t enough, BOTH of them are younger than Tony.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
i didn’t know HOF was based on wins. Yes, he will be low in the volume stats, but his effeciency is clear to anyone that really wants to know. While there are tons of dumb HOF voters (apparently) I don’t think they will look at total wins, yards, TDs only and then claim Romo doesn’t fit the bill. If his effeciency stats (not Advanced, simple Comp. %, TD-INT ratio, QB rating) is also considered he will be in the running. If nothing else, he will be up for voting before Rivers and Eli since he is older and will retire earlier, right?
Anyway, frankly, I don’t care about the HOF right now. What I do know is I would rather have Romo over Eli. Rivers is a bit better right now, but that doesn’t mean Romo isn’t a franchise QB and better than most starters in the league.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
His efficiency numbers might be more impactful if he plays 5 more years and maintains his position relative to his peers
…but again, the data says that is highly unlikely.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
the data is wrong because Romo is an exception to the rule
Just like Manning, Brady and Brees. I have no doubt guys like Rodgers, Rivers and Roethlisberger will also be exceptions as well…..most really good players are.
In Romo we Trust
His play last year would suggest that the data is not wrong
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Steve Young is a good example.
He gets in regardless of the SB.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
How do you know that for sure?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I dont but everyone around here makes bold statements and doesnt back them and passes opinion as fact
So I wanted to get in on the game hahaha
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
When did this become Faux News?
Or rather, did Faux News hire you?
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
One ain't gonna do it...
Cowboys fans aside, look down the road to that HOF-ballot (if that’s a criteria) and that aside, the peer-group. You wanna talk a tough sell? Hell, look at the controversy these Romo posts of yours and others cause.
I sense a romodus operandi at work…
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
You lead the league in prior-post references
I think 3 years and one bling MIGHT get him in the conversation if he throws for 12,000 more yards and averages 11-12 wins over that timeframe.
But you’re probably right.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Probably?!
I’ll take it. Being on the higher probablity side, I mean. On the hard sell, I’m right. Period. Unless I’m wrong.
Oh, and please excuse me for throwing a person’s words in their face, back at them, using what they’ve said perviously, but it’s kinda the basis of debate, argument and proving her/him Just. Plain. Wrong. Or right.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I take them all as compliments
…as you obviously took the time to read them.
What more can someone who writes something ask for?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
And I told you my next post would have you all riled up!!!
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not riled up because you and I both know you're dead wrong
you write the posts to get responses, I understand that.
In Romo we Trust
Well, I write them because they represent my view
I just wish your comments had more than just the casual “you’re wrong” in them.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
They do, you just choose to ignore my arguments
when they make more sense than yours..like in this instance.
In Romo we Trust
I can't call your comments an argument
…any more than I can call a dog’s bark or a bird’s chirp an argument.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
How does "you're wrong" constitute an argument?
Think back to your LSAT before you answer…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
woah i can't believe terry is a lawyer
by somebodyquiet on May 26, 2011 12:15 AM CDT up reply actions
obviously you don't read my comments
if all you’re seeing is you’re wrong. I know I write a lot more than those two words in all my comments.
In Romo we Trust
Sorry
How does “you’re wrong. You should know better bling” constitute an argument?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I write a lot more than that as well.
Bo back up through my comments….my arguments and reasons are there.
In Romo we Trust
You're right
You do write more than those 2 words. Their validity’s the question. Just as all of ours are.
Look, I know you consider me an ass, maybe figure I rag on you, pick on you, whatever, but your perspective’s just as valid, and not, as anyone’s. It’s often just so generalized, unsubstantiated when you get called out and/or unsupportable (which may occasionally explain your not responding to some call-outs, aside from a potential ego difficulty with simply admitting error) that you leave yourself open to not being taken seriously much of the time.
I get it, it’s an emotional thing, a DNA-thing as you called it.
And I know you’ve said it in some few and various contexts, but man, you really should learn to say “I’m wrong” as easily as you say “You’re wrong”. Actually, more easily, go with more easily on the “I’m wrong”.
Then again, what do I know. I’ve been wrong before and will be again.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I support my arguments
I just don’t do it with a lot of stats or metrics that everyone on this blog creams their pants about. I give my reasons even though they might appear to subjective or general to most who crave more.
Because football is the ultimate team game, evaluations and opinions of the teams and players should be very subjective and should be judged as such. It isn’t baseball.
In Romo we Trust
Well, I completely agree with your last line
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It's got little to nothing to do with...
Using stats, metrics or the like. Likewise with respect to subjectivity and generality. And please don’t make me dig up instances of you not supporting your arguments because of whatever reasons, be they your whim, choice, being confronted with irrefutable evidence, whatever. We both know the evidence of “not supporting” arguments exists as well as of “supporting”. This isn’t about that, about nailing you to a cross, crucifying you.
It’s about why some don’t take you seriously.
And stats or metrics as a pant creamer never did it much for me. Or as an argument winner unto themselves.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Remember that Atlanta Playoff Game well
was only 10yrs old, but got a congrats call from my grandfather (RIP) (big GB fan) after the game and he thought that is was one of the best comebacks he had ever seen. Thanks for bringing it up :-)
He who laughs last, thinks slowest
Well.....my days of not taking you seriously have certainly come to a middle
"Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name"
It was one of the many contests I will never forget
Lots of great players on both sides in that game too.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I agree with your premise.
I my opinion Romo has a 3-4 year window before he becomes a liability at QB. During this span, Dallas would be wise to continually invest (via draft picks) in the position. As Romo creeps closer to 35, the investment should become larger.
As far as next year is concerned, Andrew Luck (of those you mentioned) is the only QB I could just justify being in a Cowboys uniform. There are too many other positions in need of top talent to take a QB who may not see the field until 2015.
Everyone points to Aaron Rogers, but Rogers was a special case. He was talked about as being the #1 overall pick and tumbled down the draft. If Luck all of sudden was there when Dallas picks, you get him. Every other projected 1-2 round QB’s I’ll take a pass.
Stephen McGee is still on the team and developing, and even though I don’t think he’ll ever be more than a good backup, he could surprise.
"There are no traffic jams along the extra mile." ~ Roger Staubach
Reef Competitions
By the way, love these things. And while I applaud you on finding a Romo fan amongst the contestants, she isn’t a serious contender in my mind.

"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
by Kegbearer on May 24, 2011 12:38 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
wow
Bruce Carter+Sean Lee=BRUCE LEE!!!!
by Archie Barberio on May 24, 2011 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
Says the guy with the word CRACK in his moniker
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, this whole post is going to hell now…
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Romo is my heroe, no doubt
i would like to know if eli manning groupies are that hot, his wife is pretty and he has money but i think they are not as hot haha
HAHA
Yeah, though like I discussed above, Romo (and his Reef protege) are not elite. Very good and better than most, but not elite. I think 3 of the 4 above are the truely elite.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
haha
but better than nothing, if i’m going to be fussy just two of the four hotties above are elite haha
romo’s groupie isn’t elite as well but if he comes to me i say yes in a heartbeat
man oh man that is a sight for sore eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ImZTwYwCug
Poor guitarist seeking love....
Likes: Long walks on the beach, Candlelit dinners - Ear Melting Metal and Def Rhymes.... Preferably all at once.
What is best in life?
"To Crush your enemies, See them driven before you and to hear the lamentation of their women!"
My Cover of Metallica's Classic "Master of Puppets"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8aDckMo6-Q
And here's my Tribute to Fade to Black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WFVb8Go2oHs
by Nick Castillo on May 24, 2011 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions
That would be "Buttfet"
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
When BTB becomes Best Thongs & Butts
…I’ll broaden my horizon.
Until then, my photos required SOME kinda connection to Romo!
Jeesh!
;-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
HAHAHA
And I did applaud you for it…just using the opening for some more eye candy and comments.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Is that wrong?!
I gotta claim ignorance on this one.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
No
That kind of hijacking of a thread can never be wrong.
Never ever!
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
At least I hijacked it only at the bottom...
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
grrrrreat ! tushes ..loil
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
Keg,
You just made my morning, man. Thanks! I think I’ll take #2. That thing is so tight it would play finger cuffs.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions
So, since I live in Southern California...
I’ve gotten a lot of flack from people saying Romo is a better golfer than QB. This on the heels of him winning the Drew Brees Charity Tournament this past weekend.
I’ve struggled with Romo’s life off of the field for some time. I don’t like the fact that he is better known, outside of BTB circles, for things like Jessica and Cabo and golf. At the same time, it’s not reasonable to expect him not to live the life he wants to lead if it doesn’t impede others from their pursuit of happiness. But it does beg the question; when you’re the leader of a group of people (like he is supposed to be), what sacrifices are you supposed to make willingly for the good of the larger group?
I think this idea also adds fuel to the fire that if he doesn’t ever win a bling, people will say it was because he did not heed Tuna’s advice.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Leadership isn't...
sacrificing willingly or not. Willingness and those things you’re speaking of have more to do with the techniques of leadership, things that may be taught and practiced, not leadership itself. But leaving aside the inherent naturalness of leadership…
1. Supposing a thing doesn’t make it so.
2. Acting a part doesn’t make it real.
3. Doesn’t Romo’s “hitch pattern” this weekend “impede others from their pursuit of happiness” and contradict “sacrifices are you supposed to make willingly for the good of the larger group”? Maybe even some BTB’ers and not all of them female.
If the above doesn’t clearly illustrate that the “leadership” you question is inaccurate terminology relative to the personal struggle you’re referring to, the “question you’re begging”, perhaps even your assessment of the challenge and the situation, consider those times you were to “follow” someone’s “lead” in a supervisory/subordinate relationship. Were they “leaders” each and every time? Did their position make them so or not?
The position does not make the person. In either sense, talking leadership or quarterbacking.
Your difficulty with Romo in this regard has more to do with “celebrity” than “leadership”. With his supposed disregard for Parcells’ 11th commandment (“Don’t be a celebrity QB. We don’t need any of those….”) than with the preceding 10.
And while the reasoning for and meaning behind a favored dictum is entirely different, you may prefer that Tony adhere to it relative to Parcells’ advice: “Thou shalt remember the Eleventh Commandment and keep it Wholly.”
Though, if he’s only “supposed to be” or only going to be “playing the part”, the true meaning behind it would be benefical if also adhered to.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
This is true
The position does not make the person.
But how then do we measure a man’s capacity to lead? Is it purely by results? Is it by the degree to which those around him will follow?
What made George Patton, Abraham Lincoln and Gandhi such great pinnacles of leadership?
In his day, Aikman was the unquestioned leader in the locker room. Moose, Haley, Novacek, Emmitt and Irvin all say Dallas was Troy’s team. That kind of rhetoric has never been associated with Romo. But why not? Is it his demeanor? His life off of the field? The lack of success on the field? What!?!?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
in my best stimation of why......
i dont feel as tho romo has had the roster and leadership and talent in key areas that troy had…no dj /m irvin.. or emmit smith by any means, plus our defense isnt as good i dont think as theirs was bk then .
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
not to mention.....
our coaching carousel… as far as im concerned we havent had a coach equal to jj since and clearly our offensive line isnt as good ..as troys was .
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
You could be right
But guys like Archie Manning, who I doubt you could argue had better support than Romo has had, was unquestionably the leader of the saints franchise for many years.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Who played for many years and seldom left the field
…resulting in very impressive numbers in his era.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
And gave unto the world his only-begotten son...
Eli was adopted. Otherwise, it don’t work. Gets in the Eli-shot, to boot.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Peyton took most of the QB genes apparently
Eli took the leftovers and ended up with some other like being shorter, artsy, and having cramps/hot-flashes.
Eli is a very good QB
…and he has a bling like his brother.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
True
I was hoping to provoke a response more along the lines of:
“that whosoever believeth in him should not lose, but have everlasting TD’s”
Didn’t find a way around the only-begotten without using an Eli-shot.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
In order
We don’t (you seek to measure a thing which is immeasurable). No. Partially (look over your shoulder, if there’s no one there, you’re not leading).
A confluence of circumstance, character and opportunity (more simply, the right man in the right place at the right time). btw, “pinnacles of leadership” can only be seen in the rear-view mirror. It’s a hindsight thing that let’s you tell the leader from the ass.
Because he hasn’t earned it yet. He hasn’t grasped it with both hands as if it were his by birthright and held on tight as if grappling with a tiger. His manner is not one commonly associated with “jock” leadership, but closer to the mellow holistic fortitude of a Gandhi.
Perhaps, in expecting one, being confronted with another, it is unrecognizable.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
This is spot on
"pinnacles of leadership" can only be seen in the rear-view mirror
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
any good qb who plays for the Cowboys will be a celebrity in this day and age
It would be an impossibly for that not to happen with any player in that position.
Like the ss for the Yankees…automatic celebrity and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it.
In Romo we Trust
Lest we forget, Jeter has blings too
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Celebrity, yes. But off field "distractions"? No.
Do we see news reports about Jeter in Cabo during the playoffs? Or trying to play some other off season sport?
I don’t think those thing deter Romo’s performance, but your comparison to Jeter is off. (See what I did there?) And there is a huge difference between just being a celebrity and doing things that call you into question.
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 25, 2011 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions
We do about A-Rod
…that guy is crazy!
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Those things aren't distractions
those things are media driven BS because he’s qb of America’s Team.
In Romo we Trust
I'm not so sure
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
What does he know?
Garrett never had Jessica, Cabo and all of the other celebrity issues Romo has to contend with.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I am not saying those things are real distractions for Romo.
I am just saying that your comparison to Jeter is off. Yes, Jeter is a big celebrity but he hasn’t done things like Romo has that would even open the door to criticism about distractions.
Again, I don’t think those things are distracting Romo, but he brings the criticism on himself by his actions.
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions
i would take ...troys talented team w/ romo any day and twice on sundays....
outside of d-ware and witten..and dezim not impressed with many on this team .
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
Conversely...
do you think Aikman would have had a different impact on THIS team than the one Tony has had?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Great point
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
absolutely flawed argument
“because like Romo Carter, Aikman Romo didn’t play defense either.”
“because like Romo Bledsoe, Aikman Romo didn’t play defense either.”
Aside from which, a team’s about more than offense or defence. What about special teams? What about…
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
well your argument is certainly flawed
if you think a QB has that much impact on a team’s success. No doubt their impact is great and they do have the most in todays game….but they don’t single handedly determine or influence a team’s successes or failures.
In Romo we Trust
Bit it could be said...
that QBs are the only player that could single handedly loss you a game…and usually they are also the biggest single difference maker in winning one.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Which is why they are THE most important player on EVERY team
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Ahhh, you assume...
…as evidenced by your use of “if you think” and therein lies the source of your error. You proceed from an invalid assumption. I think no such thing. I simply used your format with appropriate individual name changes to illustrate the flaw in your reasoning in answering Blings’ question. btw, the reasoning part of the argument’s the part after the “because” in this case.
You would prefer: because like Ware, Carpenter didn’t play offense either? Or perhaps because like me, you didn’t play defense either?
It has nothing to do with success, failure or “single-handedly”. Or side of the ball. It has everything to do with your “absolutely not” about the impact of different individuals on each and every situation and circumstance. It’s not an “Absolute” or a “Certainty”. Period.
btw, don’t tell your wife it doesn’t matter if you were married to her or some random woman she has a dislike for. Then you’ll see what single-handedly means.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
BOOM goes the dynamite!!!
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Absolutely. Yes.
Every individual affects the situations they are involved in. Period.
To argue otherwise or conversely is a fool’s errand.
Whether that influence is significant is depends on the specfic point under consideration. A specific play, a pass, fumble, scramble, what? Aikman may have made some Romo hasn’t. Romo may have made some Aikman didn’t. I’d dare say “would have”, not “may”.
If viewed in terms of “leadership” (which I suspect your focus is here), again, yes. Different people, different personalities, different styles, manners, id/ego combinations, auras (if you will), will bring about differing reactions from those around said person and thus a different dynamic in the evolution of events and circumstances. SIgnificantly? Again, it’ll depend on the specfic point and, as stated previously, much of that can only be seen looking back in time, not forward (for the events have not yet occured).
With respect to Quarterbacking the Dallas Cowboys, playing what is generally acknowledged as the most significant position, it is probable that the influence of the individual would also be significant. Period.
The individual matters.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I agree completely
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I can agree with that.
But more importantly it is necessary to recognize that we have almost no conception of them as individuals. As such, it is a fool’s errand in my opinion to argue on the basis of an individual’s influence compared to another’s.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
You're no fun
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Well in this case I suppose that's true.
I am putting a damper on fun topics like Peyton Manning’s commercials, Tony’s trip to Cabo, and Brady’s model wife and magazine appearances.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
You must be great at parties
:-)
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
It all depends what my sobriety situation is.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
So...
4 beers and THEN you’ll talk about Jessica Simpson?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
When I get buzzed (or worse) I am liable to discuss just about anything.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Whoa! I just realized my photo could be called "When areolas attack!"
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Freeeedoooom!
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
by Kegbearer on May 27, 2011 8:00 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
HOH DID YOU JUST NOTICE!!!
Jesus, she is actually making me miss my ex.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Hater!
Blings, I cannot believe you haven’t been labeled a Romo Hater yet! Hater! hater! Tee hee.
I agree with your analysis. Romo’s play over the next 3-5 years will likely be a slow decline, but a decline nevertheless. The bigger problem is the Young Guns Rising in the NFC: Rogers, Ryan and Bradford are all in or ready to hit their prime, and don’t write off Stafford. The 3-4 of them, coupled Brees and Vick continuing to play at a good, though declining level means that Dallas will have a very difficult time advancing to the Supwer Bowl until we get a Young Gun of our own. The good news is that in the NFC East we should be competitive at the QB position with Romo since I believe he is about equal to Eli Manning and Vick.
Regardless of how Romo does in 2011, the Cowboys would be very foolish indeed to put off any further finding his eventual replacement. If a Franchise-Caliber QB is there in the 2012 draft Dallas must take him.
Very nice initial post and good responses to other bloggers throughout the string.
That is the most even-handed post I have read from you on Romo in a long time.
Posts like this won’t get you labeled a “hater.” The same can’t be said for some of your past comments.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
But who cares what people label you as?
I certainly don’t.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I don't either but it seems relevant to the poster
since he brought up the labels in the first place.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
I think he meant it as an indictment of people who do it
The fact that you agree that an unpopular view will garner him a label from the masses speaks volumes about their lack of an open mind.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I've gotta agree with that.
I personally believe Romo will play the next two years or so at an elite level, but his injuries worry me in that regard. If the line continues to play poorly, hes going to again take his share of bone crunching hits. And shoulder injuries can be a recurring problem.
Still, even if he doesn’t get injured again, his decline is inevitable. I am all for drafting a qb high in 2012 if one falls that we like. If not 2012, then qb becomes a need in 2013 when Romo hits 33. We don’t want another 8 years of frustration. Especially with the mass of skill talent on this roster.
To be honest though, those names outside Luck don’t impress me. I go to the U of A and have watched numerous USC games, and am not impressed with either Foles or Barkley. Hopefully these two can improve their senior/junior years. But I guess I wouldn’t be too down on taking them, both have legitimate potential.
I saw your post weeks ago
and have successfully avoided it and actually accomplished something in my lab in the meantime.
Another great one though Blings, and I think this will be a discussion that will start to pick up steam over the next 2 years.
You and I need to have a talk about your priorities, mister...
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Thanks Louie
This makes me think…
Regardless of how Romo does in 2011, the Cowboys would be very foolish indeed to put off any further finding his eventual replacement. If a Franchise-Caliber QB is there in the 2012 draft Dallas must take him.
…but that, as tdships so accurately stated earlier in the thread, has not been the Modus Operandi for Dallas during the Jerry Jones era.
So, while I agree with you, I think it won’t likely play out that way.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
That should have been a reply...
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
When a modus operandi is ineffective, it's time for a change, an "out".
Jerry was given his. Part, parcel, signed, sealed and wholly delivered.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
I love Romo but I agree
You can never pass on a franchise QB
by somebodyquiet on May 26, 2011 12:18 AM CDT up reply actions
id def like to see em landa good grooming qb for when romo does retire
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
This upcoming draft may be the deepest for QB's in a long time
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Cowboys will not draft a qb in the first round
next year or the year after that….take that to the bank. Jerry will never draft a player in the first round he knows will not have a shot of starting his rookie year.
Our next qb after Romo will not be a supposed franchise qb in the first round. It will be a guy like McGee who we draft in later rounds and develop.
In Romo we Trust
Deposit
I’ll deposit your comment in the bank. It will be added to other assorted deposits representing nonsense you have posted over the years….such as the deposit made when you claimed Isaiah Stanback was a lock to be the next True #1 Wide Receiver on the Dallas Cowboys when he replaced TO in the starting lineup. Your bank account of has grown quite large with assorted claims, bravado and other garbage posted on this site that you pass off as facts and truth, when in reality they are simply your opinions and wild-ass guesses.
You are entitled you your opinions just like the rest of us. You are not entitled to present your opinions as facts and truth, thereby unilaterally declaring that the opinions of others have no validity.
You never did learn to play nice in the sandbox did you? Back to Kindergarten for you!
by Cowboy.Louie on May 26, 2011 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions
That's Isaiah Stanbust
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
you're simply delusional if you think Jerry will draft a qb in the first round
until Romo is at least in his mid 30s, it won’t happen. My opinion of Stanback was just simply my opinion, never stated it as fact.
But what is fact is how Jerry looks at drafting qbs….there is no disputing that.
No way Jerry drafts a qb he will have to pay big money to a rookie qb when Romo is in his prime and still producing at a high level.
In Romo we Trust
Don't you think he might if Romo missed 5 games due to another injury this season
…and Dallas had a shot at one of the top 3 QB’s?
Or, what if Romo doesn’t come back as strongly as you KNOW he will (see what I did there?)?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
And won't there be a rookie cap next draft?
"I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass....... and I am all out of bubblegum" - George Nada
by fan since '65 on May 26, 2011 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions
McGee
I think his progression this year will play a huge role in when/if/where we draft a QB.
That being said, I think Garrett will be smart enough to know he can get a later round QB sooner than later and groom to replace Romo instead of having to invest a 1st rounder when there is no other choice.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Do you like McGee, keg?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
not to speak for Keg, Blings
But I personally do like McGee…..
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 26, 2011 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Do you think he can be Romo's successor?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Short answer?
Possibly….
Long Answer?….Given the fact that this will be his third year in the league, adding in the fact that he has performed decently in the past two games that he had significant time, I honestly believe that he had a very good chance of supplanting Kitna for the #2 spot.
However this lockout is really going to screw him over…that being said, if the owners and players can get this thing done in time for a full training camp, then keep an eye out for McGee.
From what I have seen of him, he bring alot of the same qualities that Romo has, plus is a slightly better “runner” and a slightly stronger, albeit less accurate arm. If he can get the game to “slow down” so to speak, he will make a very good QB.
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 27, 2011 2:34 AM CDT up reply actions
we got time to trade McGee if he turns out and groom another QB to be Romo's replacement.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
The post I have written here says you're wrong
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
I disagree
I think we can certainly get at minimum 4 more years out of Romo. But by that time I think we could have McGee as our #2 in 2012 and the draft prior to 2012 season or 2013 get a mid-late rounder with upside to groom. Two years on the bench and then compete for the starting job in 2014 seems realistic to me.
In short, I do think we have time to groom a replacement that isn’t a Day 1 draft pick, even if we trade McGee in a year or two. I think 2012 draft will have a QB pick. Kitna has another year, but after that we will need a QB to compete with McGee.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
So let's play that out
His deal expires in 2013.
If he can play further, dallas would need to re-sign him for multiple years.
Do you really see them doing that for a 33-34 year old QB who may not have any blings to show for it?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
If he crosses the elite barrier next year and sustains that level of play in 2013, absolutely
But as I mentioned above, if we sign a mid round QB in the next 2012 draft, they will have two seasons to learn from Romo and then have the opportunity to start in 2014.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
With Romo gone in 2014?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
You're biased
Therefore, less credible. Caused by bias being an inhibition of impartial judgment.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
we're all biased to a certain extent
but I’ll remind you in 2014 when Romo is still the starter…no problem.
In Romo we Trust
Yes, we are
You need learn that not every comment is adversarial. Some, most I would dare say, of mine to you do little more than indicate fact. Feel free to remind me, though I dare say my memory, as yet, need not be refreshed. Thankfully.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Not impossible...
But certainly on the hopeful side. I will say this: so far Romo hasn’t shown me any reason to think he won’t be playing at a high level for another 3 or 4 seasons. I mean, he has actually played less than 4 full seasons (61 games) and his body shouldn’t be breaking down just yet. I mean, Aikman had more concussions that most QBs and he played 165 games before calling it quits.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
yep, Romo's injuries were just broken bones
it’s not like he’s had concussions or back or arm injuries.
He has a lot of tread left on his tires. I’d say from a “real” age standpoint, Romo is actually 27.
In Romo we Trust
From a real age standpoint
Romo’s 31 years, 42 days of age as of the date this was posted. Quoting real doesn’t make it so.
Besides, if he played to 45 would you want to take DeBerg’s record away from Romo because of his “real” age? Or 44 and Testaverde’s? Or 49 and Blanda’s?
There. More Romo milestones for you to hope for.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
But romo hasn't shown he can take a pounding without sustaining injury
He may be a bit brittle.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
?!
He has escaped sacks and taken plenty of hits and only has 2 injuries to show for it in 4 seasons of very physical play for a QB. In short, I beg to differ sir.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
He's missed 13 of the last 48 regular season games, Keg
The non-bling winning QB’s we are comparing him to, like Eli and Rivers, haven’t missed a single game in their careers.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Depends how you look at it
You pike up games missed, but spin aside, 2 injuries in 5 seasons of play is not a sign of some fragile QB in my mind.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
13 games out of 48
It’s the crux of my argument as to why he now has to win a bling to even warrant consideration for enshrinement. I’m not even sure he gets a Ring of Honor nod at this point.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
You mean 13 of 74
he has started in 61 games and missed 13. Again, in his young career you can use the numbers to show a huge # or % of missed games. But at the end of the day, it is still only 2 injuries in 5 seasons with a bad OL. Again, i don’t think that is a sign of some injury/fragility concerns.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Fair enough
…but you’ll agree that it’s 13 more games than Eli has missed, right?
12 more than Cutler has missed.
Etc.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Yep, it is, but...
You two are arguing slightly different points. Yes, the 13 games are there, yet an injury could happen in Game 1 or 16, so the number, while it impacts the stats and the argument point, is slightly in- and out-of-context with respect to both sides of the coin. Brittleness and all the rest, well, the jury’s still out on.
That said, Tony does need to win, win big, win soon or he does face, like Philip, going down as this era’s White to Rivers’ Fouts. Are they like Proactive Reincarnation à la Retroactive Abortion?
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
smallest comment ever.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions
He just got married
The slowdown began last Saturday at Arlington Park.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
That's good because...
…women aren’t real big on quick guys. But I’ll defer to the ladies’ opinion.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Don't know, but...
Not yet. I don’t think McGee has proven it yet, that’s why I think his progression will play a big role. If he takes a big step in his 3rd year, he could become our backup in 2012 and then eventually get a chance to prove that he can be a starter.
I am not a big fan at the moment. He has the physical skills, but he needs to learn how to make reads quicker, react instead of think, and actually pull the trigger with passes down field.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
I like the deep ball that he throws
It reminds me of the ones Bartkowski used to throw. It lands in the bread basket nose down.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Yeah
I think he can throw a nice deep ball, he has the physical skills, he just needs to prove he has the mental-game time decision to read the defense and pull the trigger on those throws.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
in other words
If he can get the game to "slow down" so to speak, he will make a very good QB.
sound about right Keg?
With the 9th Pick Dallas Selects Tyron Smith...Romo Weeps in Joy, and Bennet says"I might get to go out in the Pass Pattern now!"
by I am Ironman!!! on May 27, 2011 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Yep
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Thats tough...
Teams just aren’t having much success after the 1st round nowadays at the qb position.
And interestingly enough, on a kinda unrelated note, I think the round actually does matter – teams give 1st rounders every opportunity to succeed. A 2nd, 3rd or 4th round pick gets benched or kicked out much quicker. I’m not sure the talent disparity between guys like Sanchez and Flacco and others like many 2nd rounders (ie Brady Quinn) that have been picked over the years is that large.
whoa you are correct
well, I still feel like my statement is accurate when it comes to 2nd rounders
2005:none
2006:Kellen Clemens and Tavaris Jackson
2007: Kolb and Beck have had the most success of any draft class of second rounders
2008:Brian Brohme and Chad Henne
2009:Pat White
The best 2nd round pick is a guy whose started about 5 games! You just can’t find many qbs who succeed and whose teams give them enough of an opportunity to succeed unless there is the guaranteed contract involved with a 1st round pick. Also keep in mind Brees was shown the door in SD and Romo would’ve been cut if Quincy Carter didn’t screw up.
Interesting
This morning, as I was splitting my radio timebetween The Herd and The Dan Patrick Show, Dp asked his cronies to vote on who needs a title more, Romo or Dirk. It was unanimous on Romo.
DP went on to add, in his ageement, that “Romo is just another QB without a ring” whereas Dirk is a Hall of Famer no if’s and’s or but’s. I’m not sure if people agree about Dirk being alock for the HOF, but he obviously agrees with me on Romo.
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Personally, I don't think either is a lock for HOF without a ring.
However, Dirk has been showing “Romoesque” level stats as a basketball player for nearly 15 years. Romo has 5 years under his belt. I think the conversation is much more similar after Romo has a few more seasons as a starter.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Who needs it more?
Cuban or Jerry?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
HAHA
Very similar. Both clearly want their teams to win and do everything they think possible to help their team…meanwhile often having fans angry at their failed attempts and opponents laughing at their oft ecxessive efforts that sometimes appear to be sabotage.
In my book, they are both in equal need of a championship to “gain approval” for their eccentric behavior.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Though I would say
That media, critics, and fans always expect more from the Cowboys than the Mavericks, so perhaps JJ does need it slightly more because of the higher level of expected success.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Though I would say
That media, critics, and fans always expect more from the Cowboys than the Mavericks, so perhaps JJ does need it slightly more because of the higher level of expected success.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Though I would say
That media, critics, and fans always expect more from the Cowboys than the Mavericks, so perhaps JJ does need it slightly more because of the higher level of expected success.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Does the new stadium add more fuel tot he fire for Jerry?
If Cuban wins, won’t people say it was really “Dirk’s win”?
"You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you."
- John Wooden (God rest his soul)
Jerry. Jerry. Jerry.
Donnie Nelson picks the Mavs groceries. As disappointing as it will all be when Dirk probably ends up without a ring you have to realize how sad a sack of a franchise they were before Cuban bought the team.
Jerry’s early success is his own worst enemy because fifteen years later he’s still swaggering around like a GM that knows the Colonel’s famous recipe to put together a Super Bowl Champion; only nobody is really fooled anymore.
by MadMick on Jun 1, 2011 3:16 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think I would agree
No one believes he can do it without Jimmy in the same way nobody believes Pioli can get one without Bellicheat or Shanahan can get one without Elway.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Sounds a lot like you're talking four-letter words
be it 2 or 53, once it’s more than 1, you need to be a team. Wins. Period.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
True, but I think Coach and GM must have a special relationship in order for it to all work
…and as I have said, the holy trinity in the NFL is GM, Coach and QB.
Stability there usually translates into high performance.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Isn't the Basketball Hall Of Fame a lot more inclusive(easier to get inducted into).....
Than the Pro Football equivalent? It certainly feels that way to me.
Also when has Romo ever sniffed a league-MVP award ? An All-Pro selection?
As best I can tell, Romo’s totals just won’t be that gaudy to get him in unless he wins a ring or two; or at the very least appears in a few Super Bowls and has multiple near record-breaking type seasons to go along with it.
In a league where eleven guys had at least 25 TD passes last year, when is it safe to come to the realization that sometimes they’re just real fancy numbers? Romo’s had three highly productive seasons; only three. Let’s see him either do something insanely good or play at a high level for at least three more seasons before we even mention Hall Of Fame.
Good point
He would need some kind of Jim Kelly-esque performance to at least get to the show if hsomeone was going to stake a claim to his worthiness.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
you're right..
Romo would need a couple Peyton Manning/Drew Brees in 2009/Kurt Warner at his best type years to get consideration. We will likely need to win at least 1 superbowl or go deep consistently.
As I told your compatriot, Terry,...
Agreement does not equal smarts. Or being right.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Dirk has been an NBA all-star 10 times, made 11 All-NBA teams, and has an MVP award.
And as much as everyone bemoans his lack of ring, all Dirk has done as the franchise player is lead them to 11 straight years of playoff appearances, 11 straight years of 50+ wins, and has done it in a period of time in the NBA where it takes two or three great players to win championships. That is absolutely a HOF player.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
So I think you're using the Jim Kelly/Dan Marino argument because of his volume stats, correct?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Not a single one of those stats is volume stats like total yards or total TDs.
Those are wins and media recognitions. Regardless, if you want to go into the stats, I would suggest you start with the player efficiency stats that place Dirk in the top ten just about every year and had him at #2 in 2006. And if those efficiency stats are too complicated for your tastes, you could easily go into his points per game or rebounds per game stats if you wish. Once again, neither of those are volume stats. Oh also, I suggest you take a look at the stat listed in my signature.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Let me rephrase
In the same way that Kelly and Marino had consistently high production in the areas of yards, TD’s, etc. and, as a result, garnered a great deal of pro bowl and all pro recognition but each going without a bling, they were easy picks for the HOF in the same way Dirk has had consistently high performance and similar recognition but also without the bling.
Is that your point?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Yes I suppose that is what I was going for.
In a few games or so though Dirk might go from Dan Marino to Steve Young (except with a longer career of excellence). Either way he is a Hall of Famer. And that, my friend, was my point.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Obviously, you're picking Dallas?
I picked the Heat in 6 largely due to the return of Haslem, who gives Dirk fits.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I mean I am a Dallas fan, but I recognize that they are the underdogs in the series.
Thus far in the series though things haven’t looked great. No one outside of Dirk (and maybe Chandler minus game 1) has consistently shown up to play and make the shots that are needed to make our offense run like a well-oiled machine. You have Terry struggling, Kidd really struggling, and just no consistency. Honestly, the Mavs are lucky to be at 1-2 right now. If we can come out and make some shots I think we have a good chance at forcing a game 7 where anything can happen, but we won’t get much farther just relying on Dirk to do everything.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
I've never been a fan of Jason Terry
…but Marion has played well.
The Mavs are still a team looking for a scoring threat who can create off of the dribble.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
We have been looking for that since Michael Finley left and Josh Howard lost his game.
Butler would help a bit in that regard if he was healthy but even he is still mostly a jump-shooter at heart.
If I had a nickel for every time the Eagles won the Super Bowl, I would have zero nickels
Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely the most underrated basketball player in the league right now. He is one of four players all-time to average 25+ points and 10+ rebounds in the playoffs.
Let's consider Romo versus Jay Cutler for a moment
Cutler and Romo have roughly the same amount of yards.
Romo has more TD’s (118 to 104).
Cutler has been sacked 138 times to Romo’s 106.
After that, if you took their names off of the stat sheets, you’d say there isn’t much difference between them.
Except this; Romo is a full three years older than Cutler.
So, one has to ask the question…If you extrapolate what you’ve seen thus far, purely from a statistical perspective, how do you think these two QB’s will look when juxtaposed after their careers are over?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
TD/INT ratio
Romo has 118 TDs and 62 INTs. Cutler has 104 TDs and 79 INTs. That is a big difference. Also, Cutler’s accuracy, 61.6%, isn’t as good as Romo’s, 64.1%. Cutler has gotten his team to the playoffs only once.
So, if you extrapolate, I think Romo’s superiority only increases (especially looking at effeciency stats) and you are assuming Romo ends up having a shorter career, which you can’t take for granted. In fact, Cutler has played in 68 games and Romo has played in 61, some would claim he has less wear and tear on his body (fewer sacks, fewer practice reps, fewer full games, etc.).
Sure, Cutler is 3 years younger so now you can assume he will have a longer career, but that doesn’t mean with less playoff appearances and worst effeciency stats that smart fans will recognize which was a better QB.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Should end with:
Doesn’t mean…smart fans WON"T recognize…
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Maybe...maybe not
Again, I hate the statistical platform for an argument, but his INT% is 3.6 to Romo’s 3.0. Not significantly different.
Again, this revolves around Cutler having more passes thrown in fewer years because he has been HEALTHIER.
;-)
As for the other piece, who has a longer career, the guy with more games missed due to injury or the Ironman who never misses a start?
I’d say Cutler has taken a far worse beating than Romo and always gotten back into the huddle. In fact, he’s looked like a rag doll at times. See here here and here.
And speaking of supporting casts? Who does Cutler have to throw to that you think compares favorably to Witten, Miles and Dez?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Well...
He did have Brandon Marshall for the start of his career (when Romo did not have Miles and Dez) and now he is the Martz offensive system (a stat building dream for most QBs) and Knox and Hester and Bennet and the young guy with a name I can’t pernounce have all shown some ability. Sure, I would still take MIles and Dez over either of their guys, but he isn’t exactly stuck with no WRs in a system that doesn’t help him acrew passing stats. By the way, some people may also remeber things like…
The Packers throttled the Bears receivers in the NFC Championship Game with an excellent secondary that is something the Bears will have to contend with again. But Jay Cutler missed Hester for two touchdowns in the first half when the receiver got open deep and that only can be blamed on the quarterback.
Injuries are about toughness and preparation (and a good OL when talking about QBs), but luck plays a huge role as well. Honestly, I would think that the “ironman’s” luck would eventually run out.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
Romo had T.O. in one of his best seasons as a pro
…and the whole Martz thing is another name for “career shortened by decapitation”, so I don’t buy that argument from a long-term view. Besides, how is Sean Payton’s pass-crazy offense that much different than Kyle Shanahan’s or Jason Garrett’s?
Some guys just have the ability to take a punch better than others. Glass jaw and all that…
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Sorry, should have finished the thought...
Since the new rules lean toward passing, I don’t think Martz’s wide open attack is novel anymore. Rodgers, Brees, Schaub, Romo and others are just as likely to have huge years in their systems and probably more so given that some play in domes or better climates and with better pass-catchers.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
You're Bringing Up Something
I’ve been wondering about for some time. There’s this perception Romo has been beaten to a pulp the last few years, but there’s several quarterbacks I’ve seen get hit harder and more often (Warner and Big Ben come immediately to mind, but Cutler’s a good example, too), and they keep picking themselves up and running the next play.
Romo does not seem to be as durable as even an average NFL quarterback, and it would be wishful thinking he will be getting better as he ages.
Romo has played beat up
But he has gotten two injureis he couldn’t “suck it up and play.” The broken finger on your throwing hand from hitting an uncoming helmet is just bad luck (and bad blockign). Landing on the turf (something he’s done countless times) but doing it at an angle that breaks your collar bone is bad luck. It’s not like he asks to leave the field often or has had multiple injuries to the same area of his body (ala Stafford and shoulder) nor does he get multiple injuries each year. In 5 seasons he has had 2 injuries. I am not overly concerned nor would I think that is worse than your average QB.
"I am a true believer. Anthony Spencer will have 7 or more sacks in 2011 and Stephen Bowen can ball!" - Kegbearer
"Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control." - Tom Landry
He's played with injuries that have not kept him out of games
…but I think the real question kindablue is asking is whether his body gets hurt more easily than others. Did I get that right?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
You Got It
I’m not questioning his desire or heart—just his durability. Other guys get beat up, too. I guarantee over the course of multiple seasons and thousands of passing attempts all the luck evens out.
Yes
I agree. Not all bodies respond to the collisions that take place on the gridiron the same way.
Now, a knee injury is a knee injury and there’s no doubt anyone who gets hit like carson Palmer got hit is going down for the count.
But some people can’t make it work. Isaiah Stanbust comes to mind. Not that Romo is Stanbust or Sam Bowie or anything, but any more considerable missed time and then he’ll have no shot at making a claim to greatness based on volume stats.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
…no doubt anyone who gets hit like carson Palmer Theismann got hit is going down for the count.
Ok, not a knee exactly. But it bent like one.
btw, you’re welcome. For the cringe too.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Wishful thinking?
It’s ok, Terry has a well out back. Full of pennies.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Dang,
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:11 PM CDT reply actions
Blings,
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions
You're almost @
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions
600
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:12 PM CDT reply actions
comments.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Can we
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions
get a new
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:13 PM CDT up reply actions
thread, Dave?
JK, nice post, Blings. This has been one of top three favorite threads.
Give me UR calls! Give me highstepping by CBs and PRs entering the endzone! Give me screaming on the sidelines and headbutting! Give me Fortitude, Solidarity and VIOLENCE! Bring me CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Bring me Ridolin LOL! - B'nSB
by BlueNSilverBlood on Jun 3, 2011 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions
White was a very good QB
The Cowboys defense was no where near as good when he was QB as it was when Staubach was the QB. Even at 34 he was leading the league in passing and the Cowboys were 6-2 when he got hurt midway through the 1986 season after a sack my Carl Banks. . After he was gone the Cowboys when 1-7.
I was at the game when Carl Banks broke his wrist. He was never the same after that injury. Nevertheless he came back to beat the Giants the next year not once but twice.
I was at the game in NY when he beat the Giants in 1987 too!
Amazing stuff
Just look at the names in those two lineups.
Takes me back…
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Phil Simms threw more interceptions than TDs in 1986
in 1986 and the Giants won the Superbowl.
White threw too many interceptions but he was still a good QB. And for the record he always threw for more TDs and Interceptions until he hurt his wrist except for 1984.
White could always be counted on for completing close to 60.0 of his throws , getting more than 3000 years and throwing more than 20 TDs and winning 12 games. How many other QBs could you say that about at the time?
He was a top eight QB of his era. 1980- 1983.
He wasn’t Staubach or Aikman then again those guys are both in the HOF.
The Danny White bashing is just unfair.
So I find this VERY interesting...
He was a top eight QB of his era.
Pat Kirwan thinks Romo is the 8th best QB in the league today.
Years later, you say there is a lot of Danny White bashing.
I wonder how much Romo bashing our kids will be doing in 30 years when his career is long since over? Will someone step up and say on a blog (or whatever telepathic, cybernetic communications system they use in 30 years) that Romo was a top 8 QB of HIS era? And if they do, will that change anyone’s mind?
The parallels are amazing the further you dig into this…
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
One parallel
that doesn’t exist is stage of career. Danny Whites’ career is over, Tony Romos’ is not. You always seem to be just outside the cusp of foregone conclusion when talking Romo.
I don't mean to appear that way but I can only use historical evidence and what I know, from watching Romo with my own eyes, in order to make any comparisons
There is nothing that says Tony won’t get 3 blings in the next 3 years.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Here's where we diverge
I actually think Romo is a very good quarterback. Give me Romo over Danny White any day. ’Course you already know I am not much of a Danny White fanboy.
You forgot the most important statistic
for a quarterback, and that’s turnovers. Comparing him to Phil Simms is strange, because no one to my knowledge has said he was anything more than mediocre. Those Giants teams of the 80’s won with their defensive front seven. Their quarterbacking was actually subpar by my measures.
Claiming he was a top eight quarterback of his era is misleading. There were only ten quarterbacks who were regular starters all four years, so saying he’s in the top eight isn’t saying much. If the list is expanded to include those quarterbacks who were regular starters for three of the four years, it still only includes 18 quarterbacks, but by my measures White would rank 11th in that group.
Setting the frame between 1980 and 1983 also conveniently ignores the batch of great quarterbacks who entered the league at the end of that period: Marino, Elway and Esiason, all three who went on to have much greater careers. So, it looks like you’re cherry picking the data to make your argument look attractive.
Since 2006
He did not have a good year in 2008, but otherwise I think he’s played very well. Pretty good ball protection and outstanding yards per attempt.
I haven't finished running the 2010 numbers yet
But at a glance, he actually played very well last year.
Also...
do you think some QB’s have turnover numbers that are larger because they lack a supporting cast that enables them to be more efficient?
I think about Aikman and how he didn’t have to take the team and carry it as often as some of his contemporaries did. Look at Cutler. No balance in Denver and nobody to throw to in Chicago. Is he forced to do so much that he’s just generally going to have more INT’s?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
No question the supporting cast
Affects the outcome. However, I think it tends to get overstated. Look at for example Joe Montana. He was a very inexperienced quarterback with hardly any talent around him when he showed up, but by his second year was putting up outstanding numbers. Late in his career he went to Kansas City, and without the same talent and coaching, still put up excellent numbers. To a lesser degree you can say the same for Peyton Manning. His supporting cast has turned over a couple of times since he’s been there, but he consistently performed brilliantly. Bad players do affect the performance, but my sense is it’s not as extreme as many think.
I know you’re not into stats much, but one study I’ve wanted to do is to see how a quarterback’s performance varies when changing teams, taking into account their career trajectory. Maybe I’ll get to it once I get out of grad school.
On Montana, I'd say the system Walsh employed inflated his numbers
I don’t think defenses had a clue how to stop it early on.
As for Manning, I have no rebuttal. I’m not sure Marvin Harrison starts for any other team if he doesn’t land in Indy, but with Manning, he’s one of the most productive guys around for years.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I must be missing something major with Harrison.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HarrMa00.htm
1st round draft pick who went over 60 receptions and 800 yards his first two seasons in the league without Manning. And this is a guy incapable of even being a starter without Manning? Even though, in fact, he not only started but produced his first two seasons in the league; WITHOUT Manning.
Fill me in on what I’m missing exactly.
I’m not suggesting Peyton throwing to him didn’t insanely bump up his career numbers but I think he was capable of being a regular 1,000 yard receiver plenty of other places.
If you want to compare him to a highly productive current receiver who isn’t necessarily a superstar I’d go with the Giants Steve Smith. But Harrison’s definitely not a guy who would’ve washed out of the league or been a 3 on most other teams without Peyton making him.
Okay, I was probably harsh on Harrison...
as his route running skills set the standard for many years. At the same time, I never saw him as a game breaker and 60/800 wasn’t going to get you much when guys like Moss and T.O. were setting the new bar at 1200 yards.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Eric Moulds. Taken two picks later than Harrison by the Bills.
Bigger receiver. Had a few monster years here and there with Fluties and Bledsoes and even the likes of hippy surfer dillweed Rob Johnson throwing to him.
I imagine he would’ve stepped up his game a great deal playing with Peyton and had a monster 7-8 year window up through ’05. He was nearly a career 10,000-yard guy as it is.
As for Moss and T.O., when people have brought them up before in relation to Manning, it’s asked if he could ever tolerate loafers or loudmouths in his huddle? The Colts certainly never made a push for or even considered either of those guys when they were there to be had for a nominal price in draft picks.
Back to Harrison, he also probably had the best hands in the game for years upon years. Moss and T.O. are too easy since nobody was on par with them. I think better examples of guys who weren’t huge receivers but brought a lot more home run capability to the table than Harrison were Isaac and Bruce.
Isaac and Bruce
Is that like Pink and Floyd? :-)
I think you’re right though. Indy is one of those places where the right kind of guy is more important than the right guy.
One has to wonder though, if Peyton had more guys who could threaten the NE DB’s and break their physical press, could Manning have beaten Bellicheat instead of being bounced by him? And if so, would HE be the guy with 4 blings and not Brady?
What price does a team pay for pursuing that RKG strategy rather than taking on the Charles Haley’s and Deion Sanders’ of the world?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Feck me running. Bruce and Holt.
Well, considering that Ty Law picked off Manning in another playoff game twice playing for the pushover Chiefs, I think he deserves a little of the credit for being that grade of corner.
Also we start getting into some murky waters when we try to guess how much more a guy could’ve done with superstar X. I mean Brady had one unbelievably good “I only thought this sh*t was possible in video games” season throwing to a reinvigorated Moss but he doesn’t have any more rings from having him to throw to. Although your hypothetical is one where Manning gets one of those types over the course of his career. Moss probably wasn’t the same Moss in ’09 as he was in ’07.
Also it’s worth noting that with Moss and T.O. heads and shoulders above the rest but for the most part never playing with legit contender teams and franchise QB’s at the same time that none of the other consistent contenders had great receivers either besides those “Greatest Show on Turf” Rams teams from the turn of the century.
As for the RKG strategy, you’re preaching to the choir on the “nobody wins with all choirboys” philosophy. Or at least they wait a good long while to as Peyton and Dungy did.
The problem is you have to find the right balance or else you end up with “too many turds in the punch bowl.” Haley decides to take a sick day against the Packers where the Cowboys build an early big 24-3 lead only to see it begin to dwindle before the half. Who’s there to chew his ass out? Aikman, of course. “I hope you’re forking happy!”
Haley, of course, suits up at the half. But worse than not having anybody to hold other guys accountable the Cowboys have been saddled with too many bad example older guys to go with marginal younger guys. And that’s how you end up with silly shenanigans like shoulderpad gate.
Same system for Law so I think the Bellicheat factor played a role
…in his success against Manning, but who knows for sure?
Yeah, the “what if Dallas had drafted Randy Moss?” thing comes up early and often when you look at what could have happened, the specualtion factor skyrockets.
On the RKG thing, maybe JG thinks he already has too many highly talented prima donnas and needs more guys who say "how high? when he says jump.
People underestimate how much Aikman had to lead with players on both sides of the ball. Does Romo do that? Does he know how? Did Kitna?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Nonsense
They had plenty of clue. On Walsh/Montana’s WCO and how to defense it. One, look at the Walsh/Anderson Bengals for the preliminary version. Two, look at the 9er’s own D. One of Walsh’s moves was defensing his O before unleashing it.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Simple
Look at the early ’80’s 49er’s transition roster- and performance-wise. Notice the predominant characteristic in the 1980-82 drafts/FA. Hell, in ‘81 alone they rebuilt the secondary from near-brutal to all-pro with Lott, Williamson, Hicks, Wright. Went from ’79’s 2-14 to ’81’s 13-3 and a SB title, with 1980’s 6-10 intermediary record and the barest beginnings of what we know today as the WCO being put in place. 1980 was nowhere near the offense the 49er’s let loose later. Then look at the post-82 focus relative to players and gameplan. Remember, Walsh, or any incoming coach, needs initally work with the resources at hand and transition to his overall strategy.
This may be one area where JG has a leg up, to boot.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Not convincing
I’ve read Walsh’s bio and don’t recall any mention. Lots of teams were making the transition to passing defense given the 1974 and 1978 rules changes, becoming quicker and in many cases switching to the 3-4 defense. Does that mean they were all preparing to defend the WCO?
So the king of accusing others of speculation is just speculating! Hah! :-P
Wrong. The most important statistic
for a QB’s W’s.
Ok, that outta the way, I was going to make a comment up the line a ways where you two were arguing yardage, interceptions and the like, but here’s a more appropriate place, I think. It goes beyond yardage, ints, rating, td’s, the percentages for various stat categories and such things, guys. Look White/Romo over between the 28-20 age range, comprehensively, relative to their peer groups and I believe you’ll find Romo with a marginal edge in terms of overall statistical performance. Marginal. Not the “much better” that was stated in the thread area where I was going to make this comment. Also neither the restrictive yardage, rules/era nor ints focus that was being used in that same comment thread up higher. Neither “much better” nor “much worse”. The comparison bounces around a bit, but the comprehensive comparison over an equivalent or roughly equivalent period shows no significant difference relative to their respective era or peer group. And that’s not a quantifiable, statistical, numbers evaluation, but an eyeballing “feel” of the stats. Ahhh, harmony…
Remember, White’s retired, QB starter at 28 and played to 36, Romo’s active, QB starter at 27 and 31 this year.
The question is: What’s the future hold? Then a comparison can be validly performed.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
It's Hard to Pin Wins
On a quarterback when he can’t control how the defense or special teams play. Given what he can control, I’ll stand by my comment that his most important statistic is turnovers.
Actually, I have a database of every season of every quarterback in league history, and have normalized their performance to the league average in that year. By that measure, White was never a very good quarterback. On the other hand, Romo came out of the gate playing great, and except for his 2008 season, has been very good. Romo would have to turn into Ryan Leaf for several years to drop down to the level of Danny White. Given the career trajectories that players typically follow, that’s not going to happen. That’s why I’m so comfortable making the comment that Romo will be remembered as a better quarterback than White. Keep in mind by my measures White average most years, so his standard is not hard to pass.
Following such reasoning...
It’s hard to pin turnovers on a QB when a RB fumbles. Or a receiver hands-of-cement tips the ball. Or blows a route. Or a C muffs the snap. Or when an opposing CB simply makes the play. They’re all turnovers. Perhaps you mean to restrict turnovers to interceptions? Hands-of-cement tips still applies. Blown route still applies. Where’s the responsibility for the TO lay? Pinning such things on the QB takes stretching the individual as being responsible in a team and multiple-player dependent context to a tenuous degree. Where’s the stats on that in this dataset you’re using? Do they exist, segmented out and identified? I’d wager not.
Does the normalization take into account playing different teams, different personnel packages, different game situations? Even same era comparisons are difficult, much less spanning eras.
White was average or marginally above most years in terms of league-wide starting QBs. Beloved by a segment of Cowboys fanbase, no doubt, but that’s a biased population to begin with. But comparing him to Marino, Elway, Esiason and such as peers is problematic in that he was significantly older. Why not throw Montana in there? Now, Bartkowski, Fouts, Zorn, Jaworski and company, same age +/- 1 year, there’s a more valid comparison.
Tony’s marginally above White’s marginal exceeding of the average performances within their respective peer groups. Your “That’s why I’m so comfortable making the comment that Romo will be remembered as a better quarterback than White” statement’s a speculative opinion based on statistics that’ve been cherry-picked. Throw the 30+ age years out of the comparison for now, on both sides. Should be easily done, they only exist for one side.
I’m not trashing Tony or Danny. Not making more of either of then than they’ve proven to be. Not speculating on Romo’s potential future, either way. Simply pointing out the comparison’s problematic and prone to questionable conclusions either way based on preconception, chosen methodologies and even opinion skewing an investigation whether recognized or not.
Better define “better” between you two before entering into such things. But good luck with agreeing on what constitutes “better”.
btw, who’s the “better” QB, Bradshaw or Kenny Anderson? It’s good to have a ring. Makes a world of difference in the way one’s remembered. Sometimes even if one is.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
This part is hard to run away from...
Tony’s marginally above White’s marginal exceeding of the average performances within their respective peer groups.
…and I would argue that if you looked at other 30-33 year old QB’s, he’s behind most of them in yards and TD’ s and, sadly, postseason success.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Hmmm
When I said turnovers that I meant interceptions and fumbles by the quarterback. Obviously the quarterback is not responsible for say a fumbled punt return. It’s so axiomatic it didn’t need to be explained.
Normalization takes into account the relative performance of quarterbacks within each year, which is the most important global variable. So, for example, Staubach’s ability to put up modern passing efficiency in a dead ball era ranks him among the great quarterbacks of all time. It does not normalize yet for defenses faced, although I plan to include that down the road.
Now, Bartkowski, Fouts, Zorn, Jaworski and company, same age +/- 1 year, there’s a more valid comparison.
Probably so, but I was responding to the blanket comment that White was among the top eight quarterbacks from 1980-1983. I didn’t pick the comparison, someone else did.
statement’s a speculative opinion based on statistics that’ve been cherry-picked. Throw the 30+ age years out of the comparison for now, on both sides. Should be easily done, they only exist for one side.
I don’t think you understand what I mean when I say “career trajectory”. Once a player establishes a certain level of high performance early in his career, he’s shown he’s going to be really good. Look at any of the greatest quarterbacks in league history. Unitas, Montana, Manning, you name one. Relative to their peers, even at a young age, they stood out. Once they established a level of high performance, it stays with them their entire career. Joe Montana didn’t suddenly go south at the age of 31. Nor did Peyton, nor did Ken Anderson, nor did Staubach. That a great or even very good player can be found early in his career is not a controversial concept, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue here. One of the first things I did when setting up my passing rating system was to evaluate how Romo performed at the age of 26 relative to his league peers, to see whether he was just a one-year wonder, or if his performance separated him from other 26 year-olds. The conclusion I came to was he was at the upper end of quarterbacks in league history. So, it’s not cherry-picking, that’s an insulting term to the statistical normalizations and broad-based historical comparisons that were made; and it’s not speculative, because there’s plenty of history out there to show Romo is well above the Danny White level of performance at the same ages, and it’s not controversial to believe that higher level of performance will continue into the future. Once you understand the dynamics and history, looking into the future is not nearly so fraught with uncertainty as you make it sound.
btw, who’s the "better" QB, Bradshaw or Kenny Anderson?
This is one of your deadpan jokes, right? Ken Anderson is one of the ten best quarterbacks to ever step onto a football field. Terry Bradshaw probably would not make my top 200 list of all time.
I love this...
Ken Anderson is one of the ten best quarterbacks to ever step onto a football field. Terry Bradshaw probably would not make my top 200 list of all time.
I watched both play and while I’d take Anderson when it came to throwing the 12-15 yard crossing route, I’d take Bradshaw on any throw over 20 yards every single time. Bradshaw, like Plunkett and Bartkowski and Fouts had this way of getting the deep ball hit their receiver in perfect stride with the added benefit of having the nose of the ball point slightly downward with a perfect spiral, which aids the receiver greatly. Come to think of it, I saw Jeff Blake throw the ball like that too.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I do think that most of the world looks at QB's as either winners or losers
Marino, Kelly, Tarkenton, Archie Manning and others are guys who always get talked about AFTER you mention the Montana’s and Bradshaw’s and Elway’s of the world because of the number of times they rode on the front of the bus in a parade after the Super Bowl was over.
I think Marino should be in that discussion as one of the best ever, but he won’t be, he just won’t be.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
It goes to show the depth
Of ignorance in the football public world. Don’t disagree with you, though.
No way look at any top 10 qb list
and youll never see bradshaw but you will see marino
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
NO way?
Hmmmm.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1930076
Maybe not no way.
I think most lists don’t have Bradshaw in the top 10 in the same way Aikman isn’t in the top 10.
And maybe they shouldn’t be. But one thing is sure, they have what several of the guys who are typically on the list do not have, the blings.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Yea yea
ESPN list from 2004. Whatever, if anyone tried to seriously tell me TB is better than DM I will laugh at them and never talk football with them again.
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
The fact that it's from 2004 should be meaningless
…except for QB’s who popped on later. The TB/DM thing is fromyesteryear so this is one man’s ranking. My point is that TB WAS on this list and some people (including some who have HOF votes) see them both belonging in that top 10 conversation.
Not saying I agree, but I am saying you may be undervaluing TB.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Ummm...
“So, it’s not cherry-picking, that’s an insulting term…”
First, no insult was intended. Used the term equivalently to your use of it in this statement (from above) “So, it looks like you’re cherry picking the data to make your argument look attractive”. Your data’s incomplete, as it does not allow isolation of constituent data items (such as the turnover/interception “at fault” example illustrates) nor take into account the contextual differences in terms of specfic situations relative to each individual in the circumstance they were faced with at a point in time. Quite simply, you cannot do such a thing. Period.
Your “cherry picking” is a broad-based adjustment of statistics. As I’d asked elsewhere, when the Cowboys won a Super Bowl title, were statistical minutiae on your mind, even the score. They’re debated these ways when your team’s losing. When they’re winning, it’s more the “look how impressive our QB, RB, WR is”. Or how good our Offense is. Or how many sacks, or how few yards given up or…
This game is about far more than the statistics. One thing I noticed about myself was that they lessened in importance and consideration over the years. Where they were all-consuming, important, more meaningful or whatever you want to call it years ago, they are less so now. They’re interesting, sometimes, but very prone to the “lies, damn lies and statistics” quotations bandied about. People use them to support points, points usually with preconceived agendas, not purely unbiased determination of fact through numerical data and mathematics. The data gathering in this type of instance itself is problematic to determining the facts of the matter. See the TO/int point and lack of data segmentation and isolation yet again.
Look, I know that’s not what you’re concerned with here. Just know I’m not insulting your perspective or your use of statistical methodologies or data to support it. But I do find it a blindered, tunnel-visioned approach to appreciation of the game. For me, that is.
And nope, no deadpan joke. Simply making a point about “better” being subjective. With some selective (dare I use “cherry-picked”?) statistics, Anderson’s “better”. Then get selective relative to each player’s strengths or weaknesses, it shifts. Now switch those stats to be number of Super Bowl victories, and voilà, Bradshaw is.
Ask Anderson if he’d give up some numbers to have one of them rings. Or Marino. Or Fouts.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Okay
So you’re skeptical of statistical analysis. You’d rather base your opinions on your personal observation. That’s fine. We’ll have to agree to disagree.
However, statistical analysis, if done properly, can lead to a greater understanding of a subject. I started my work on NFL statistics a quarter century ago, and I believe I have accomplished just that. Statistical analysis draws plenty of “lies, damn lies and statistics” arguments, and a good deal of the analysis, and criticism are based from the point of view of not understanding how to evaluate statistics. There are accepted professional methods of performing single and multivariate regression, analysis of variance, null hypothesis tests and other procedures to evaluate data. Most sports statistics analysis falls far short of those accepted techniques. However, those techniques are used throughout the world by the government, many major industries, the military, and academic researchers, and have been used to make critical decisions regarding public health and the economy for decades. When done properly, these tools can illuminate a subject to make better decisions, much better than one would otherwise by simply going by subjective opinions or just eyeballing the numbers.
Note that statistical analysis by itself is nearly worthless. One has to understand the dynamics of the subject, and with that familiarity with the subject matter, then statistical analysis can bring into sharper contrast with is important and what is not.
Not trying to convert you, but do want you to understand there is another world out there that uses this stuff every day to make very important decisions. Applying those same tools to NFL stats would not be viewed as either not controversial or radical by those who are familiar with the process, provided the correct processes were used.
Sceptical of everything, not just statistical analysis
Lived in that world, to boot. You could say I was a true-believer. Doesn’t impress me as much anymore.
btw, the key wordings in your comment are “I believe” and “done properly”. Belief is not fact. Properly done is a rarity. Not just with respect to statistics, but in many fields of human endeavour. I’m done holding out hope either’s a virtue with respect to humanity.
Gentlemen, we’re 0-16. Let’s change that.
Here's where I think we're not communicating
I’m not a “true believer” in statistics, any more than I am a “true believer” in Newton’s laws of motion or heat transfer theory. They are scientific facts used as tools to better understand the laws of nature. It’s possible that somehow we could discover those theories are all wrong, that there is something that better explains physical phenomena, so in that sense my acceptance of those facts are provisional—as is the case with any scientific theory. But the term “true believer” applies in the religious realm, not in the scientific. One is based on blind belief without facts. The other is based on making repeated observations against the theory.
Have you ever thought about putting that up as part of a fanpost?
I’d love to see that and your rationale…
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I've been posting season results
Since 2007. The latest results are here, and you can search out my earlier years pretty easily.
Strange you don’t remember that, because you’ve been among my most vocal critics over the years.
Wonder how I missed that one...
as most stat-heavy posts don’t usually go without a comment or two from me.
As you so aptly pointed out.
:-)
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
At least I can pat myself on the back for predicting the Chargers would run more
In 2009, they ran 39.4% of the time as opposed to 45.7% of the time in 2010.
Booyah.
So how did Rivers’ efficiency change YOY?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Congrats
Although I don’t recall disagreeing with you on that.
I need to run the 2010 numbers, which I hope to do this month. Still decompressing from graduate school and a very busy work schedule the last several months.
Simms was better than McMahon. Easily.
The Bears defense was even better than that of the Giants.
by Jonathan Stern on Jun 6, 2011 6:43 AM CDT up reply actions
That Bears defense was amazing
Their DB’s were suspect and only Marino could find a way to burn them.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
+1
White was already on the way down . So comparing him to Elway and Marino and Kelly who came to the league when White was on the way down is just not fair.
There are some who think that Phil Simms is a HOF QB.
White looks solid or better compared to his peers. It is right to call him franchise type QB during his best years.
Joe Thiesman only had like 4 good years in the league and most people say that he was pretty good.
Great post.
Also I think this have the most T & A shots I’ve ever seen in one thread. That has to count for something.
AFB Condensed- New name, same flavor.
Where in the HECK have you been?
I was starting to take your lack of comment as a sign that I was losing my touch and should hang up my keyboard. BTW, how do you hang up a keyboard?
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
Lots of string I suppose.
Just been busy brother.
Hoping that our Cowboys can turn a corner in toughness and team attitude that the Mavs and Rangers have.
AFB Condensed- New name, same flavor.
It's been 13 days now, Blings
Time for a new post.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jun 5, 2011 1:17 PM CDT reply actions
Almost there...and it is a takeoff on something you did...
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I'm already itchin' for my next fix, man.
I just got done writing almost 10,000 words across three articles for the upcoming Cowboys Annual, now I need something to take my mind off the numbers.
Of course, Chia does that in two days, but it took me a couple of weeks.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jun 5, 2011 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
yeah hey when can we preorder!
You going to post it soon im anxious haha I don’t want to go preorder on my own dont you guys get affiliate credit or something haha
Tony Romo 2011's League's Most Valuable Player
It’ll be a while yet. Last year the magazine was published in August and preorders opened in May, but I guess this year that depends a little on the status of the CBA. Dave will let us know in good time.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jun 5, 2011 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions

by 


























