andrew luck vs romo

[Steven_81]

would u give romo and a 1st and 2nd round pick for andrew luck??

[Risen Star]

Yes, I would.

It's a big gamble, but I'd take that chance that I'd be getting the next great QB at the beginning of his pro career.

[Steven_81]

i love romo but would like to get the future qb

[Risen Star]

i love romo but would like to get the future qb

Well, the Cowboys would never do it, so don't get your hopes up.

[Duane]

I would but the Colts wouldn't.

[Steven_81]

i know they wont that is just my wish list ahahaha

[Idgit]

God, no.

Great QB play in the NFL is too rare to give up 5 years of it in the hope of finding a younger player you hope ends up as good. Much less throwing in the extra picks. I'd much rather scout for the next Drew Brees at the top of the second.

[tm1119]

God, no.

Great QB play in the NFL is too rare to give up 5 years of it in the hope of finding a younger player you hope ends up as good. Much less throwing in the extra picks. I'd much rather scout for the next Drew Brees at the top of the second.

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.

[burmafrd]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.


and you are truly blind

[DFWJC]

would u give romo and a 1st and 2nd round pick for andrew luck??
Romo can only dream.

[Idgit]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.

:laugh2:

[tm1119]

and you are truly blind

Yup blinded by our 1 playoff win....Im not a Romo hater and Im fine with the fact that he isnt going anywhere anytime soon. But Romo a great QB? Thats just flat out untrue. Anybody who thinks that is clearly a homer.

[Tricericon]

would u give romo and a 1st and 2nd round pick for andrew luck??

Not a proverbial snowball's chance. The median first overall pick QB of the last 20 years is David Carr.

David. Carr.

I'll keep the last 3-4 good years of my top quartile QB, thanks, and we can gamble on someone else later - and that's straight up. I certainly ain't throwing in two more high draft picks to get a worse player!

[egn22]

Not just no, but HELL no. I'm not even a big Romo fan, but that's waaay too much to give up for a POTENTIALLY great QB. If i'm Indy i jump all over that, and focus on rebuilding my team with a proven NFL QB.
the whole 1 playoff win thing, doesn't really hold weight when you truly examine the defense he's played with in the past few years, along w/ the poor O-line. No way i get that emotional and risk my team's future for an unproven QB.
If he busts, you are through.

[egn22]

not to mention, you can probably get more picks for Manning.

[BraveHeartFan]

Yup blinded by our 1 playoff win....Im not a Romo hater and Im fine with the fact that he isnt going anywhere anytime soon. But Romo a great QB? Thats just flat out untrue. Anybody who thinks that is clearly a homer.


And there it is. Right on cue.

You had an opinion, you were doing well in posting it, someone didn't agree and without fail, cause you have nothing to back up your opinion of it, or are too lazy to do so, you go right to the homer tagline.

The sign of a person with a truly weak argument or no confidence in their opinion at all.




As for the question...yeah I'd likely do it. If I thought that Luck would what was needed around him and I felt pretty good that giving up multiple high round picks wasn't going to set the rest of the team back so far that it would hinder Luck.


Which isn't a shot at Romo in the least, because I happen to believe Romo is great and is in that top 5-7 range in the NFL at this point. I believe the Cowboys can win with him, and should win with him.

But if we could get Luck, with the possibility of him being everything people thinks he's going to be, yeah that's a pretty special player then.

OF course that could backfire right in your face but that's part of the NFL. The Gamble.

[tm1119]

And there it is. Right on cue.

You had an opinion, you were doing well in posting it, someone didn't agree and without fail, cause you have nothing to back up your opinion of it, or are too lazy to do so, you go right to the homer tagline.

The sign of a person with a truly weak argument or no confidence in their opinion at all.




As for the question...yeah I'd likely do it. If I thought that Luck would what was needed around him and I felt pretty good that giving up multiple high round picks wasn't going to set the rest of the team back so far that it would hinder Luck.


Which isn't a shot at Romo in the least, because I happen to believe Romo is great and is in that top 5-7 range in the NFL at this point. I believe the Cowboys can win with him, and should win with him.

But if we could get Luck, with the possibility of him being everything people thinks he's going to be, yeah that's a pretty special player then.

OF course that could backfire right in your face but that's part of the NFL. The Gamble.

There is no argument. Do I really need to bring up Romo's stats VS the top 4 QB's in the league? Do I have to bring up the lack winning in his career? I thought it was all very obvious and unnecessary.

[egn22]

There is no argument. Do I really need to bring up Romo's stats VS the top 4 QB's in the league? Do I have to bring up the lack winning in his career? I thought it was all very obvious and unnecessary.

Funny that you say these things, and the mock in your sig STILL doesn't include an OL. Give the guy a break, and less give him a decent O-Line! :)

[BraveHeartFan]

There is no argument. Do I really need to bring up Romo's stats VS the top 4 QB's in the league? Do I have to bring up the lack winning in his career? I thought it was all very obvious and unnecessary.


To be quite honest I don't care what you have. I just find it funny that instead of simply saying why someone has this or that opinion they go immediately to name calling and labeling.

When that's the standard for the person then I don't worry about giving their thoughts, or opinions, much merit. Even when their initial thoughts or opinion could possibly have had some interesting discussion.

So yeah whey don't you post those stats against the top 4 QBs and see how they compare.

Oh, I know why you didn't, because his stats fair very favorably with the top 5 QBs in the league.

And I'm sure when you're done with the winning part of it that you'll be posting said winning numbers for the other 21 positions on the starting teams? You know since winning is a team accomplishment where as individual stats are just that, individual.


Probably not huh? Better to resort to your name calling and labeling cause it's quicker and easier.

[BraveHeartFan]

Funny that you say these things, and the mock in your sig STILL doesn't include an OL. Give the guy a break, and less give him a decent O-Line! :)

I like the first 2 picks in his mock, though I definately feel we need to improve the interior O-Line.


After his first 2 picks i'm not liking any of it.

[tm1119]

Funny that you say these things, and the mock in your sig STILL doesn't include an OL. Give the guy a break, and less give him a decent O-Line! :)

That was with my plan of signing Carl Nicks....

[03EBZ06]

Hell no, I wouldn't.

We know what Romo brings to the table but Luck and RG3 is just an NFL prospect right now, nothing more.

[BraveHeartFan]

That was with my plan of signing Carl Nicks....

Very smart part of your plan.

[tm1119]

To be quite honest I don't care what you have. I just find it funny that instead of simply saying why someone has this or that opinion they go immediately to name calling and labeling.

When that's the standard for the person then I don't worry about giving their thoughts, or opinions, much merit. Even when their initial thoughts or opinion could possibly have had some interesting discussion.

So yeah whey don't you post those stats against the top 4 QBs and see how they compare.

Oh, I know why you didn't, because his stats fair very favorably with the top 5 QBs in the league.

And I'm sure when you're done with the winning part of it that you'll be posting said winning numbers for the other 21 positions on the starting teams? You know since winning is a team accomplishment where as individual stats are just that, individual.


Probably not huh? Better to resort to your name calling and labeling cause it's quicker and easier.


1st, take a look at the other guy calling me dumb and blind for no reason. Is calling him names back the mature thing to do? No, but oh well this is the internet. No one is mature.

2nd, you must be kidding if you think Romo's #'s stack up to the actual great QB's. We are talking about guys that its considered a down year if they throw for less than 4000 yards and 35 TD's. Thats a career year for Romo.

3rd, Pats have the worst D in the league this year, but they are in the Super Bowl. Colts win 10 games with Peyton, 2 without. Great QB's like Brady, Manning, and Brees are worth 10 wins by themselves. Romo is not that QB, nor will he ever be.

[CATCH17]

We have so many other holes that I wouldn't do that trade because as much as I like Andrew Luck I don't see him as being a top guy anytime soon.



But if I were to trade Romo and some picks for him than I would completely blow the thing up and trade Demarcus Ware for all I could get.

[ringmaster]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt. OMG your credibility has just went out of the window.

[dalboy]

its threads like these that make question why I even come to this forum anymore

[egn22]

i think the arguing is annoying, but i appreciate this site more than most others related to the cowboys. my favorite is cowboysnation. this is my second pick when i want to read about cowboys related stuff.

[Dash28]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.
:lmao2:

[BraveHeartFan]

1st, take a look at the other guy calling me dumb and blind for no reason. Is calling him names back the mature thing to do? No, but oh well this is the internet. No one is mature.

2nd, you must be kidding if you think Romo's #'s stack up to the actual great QB's. We are talking about guys that its considered a down year if they throw for less than 4000 yards and 35 TD's. Thats a career year for Romo.

3rd, Pats have the worst D in the league this year, but they are in the Super Bowl. Colts win 10 games with Peyton, 2 without. Great QB's like Brady, Manning, and Brees are worth 10 wins by themselves. Romo is not that QB, nor will he ever be.

First he said you were truly blind.

He didnt' call you names. He didn't resort to giving you some tag of homer or realist or any of that other crap. He said you were blind, in his opinion, for not seeing how good Romo is.

You took that and immediately called him a homer for it to which he resorted in a childish way by calling you dumb and you then have to call him an idiot.

Ruined any chance that a quality discussion on the subject could have been had by you two on the subject that would have beneficial.


Now as for the stats I provide the following:

These are the stats for Romo, Manning, Rodgers, Brees, and Brady over the last 4 full seasons. Brady and Romo have both missed significant time in a season a piece so I went with 4 to be on even seasons with all 4 players.


68.9 4806 50td 8 int 21 sacks
65.7 4398 28 td 13 int 16 sacks
65.9 3900 36 td 4 int 25 sacks
65.6 5235 39 td 12 int 32 sacks


67.5 4423 28td 18 int 16 sacks
65.0 5069 34 td 17 int 13 sacks
68.1 4620 33 td 22 int 25 sacks
71.2 5476 39 ts 12 ints 24 sacks


64.4 4211 36td 19 int 24 sacks
61.3 3448 26td 14 int 20 sacks
63.1 4483 26 td 9 int 34 sacks
66.3 4184 31 td 10 int 36 sacks


63.6 4038 28 td 13 int 34 sacks
64.7 4434 30 td 7 int 50 sacks
65.7 3122 28 td 11 int 31 sacks
68.3 4643 45 td 6 ints 36 sacks

56.1 3336 23td 20 int 27 sacks
60.3 3238 21td 10 int 27 sacks
62.9 4002 31 td 25 int 16 sacks
61.0 4933 29 td 16 int 28 sacks



That's the stats of the guys who've pretty much been argued as the top 4 or 5 QBs along with Romo. Now look at those numbers and tell me whose who without having to look it up.


I noticed you mentioned the 4000 yards, below that being a down year for them and 4000 being a great year for Romo....well as you can see, if you know which ones are his, he obviously does that quite regularly as well.

You also mentioned 35 TDs....as you can see all the numbers here they all missed that mark at least 1 time and one of them, whose a across the board top 3 QB has missed it 3 times. Then you have the other guy whose NEVER thrown for 35 TDs (i'll give you a hint, that one ain't Romo), and yet he's considered one of the top 5 QBs.

So, please, try and tell me again how his stats don't stack up with those guys.


You mentioned your 4000 yards and 35 tds and I quickly dispelled those as false so whats next on the excuse list for how his numbers don't stack up against theirs?

[BraveHeartFan]

i think the arguing is annoying, but i appreciate this site more than most others related to the cowboys. my favorite is cowboysnation. this is my second pick when i want to read about cowboys related stuff.

I'll have to check this cowboysnation out. I've never been there.

[tm1119]

First he said you were truly blind.

He didnt' call you names. He didn't resort to giving you some tag of homer or realist or any of that other crap. He said you were blind, in his opinion, for not seeing how good Romo is.

You took that and immediately called him a homer for it to which he resorted in a childish way by calling you dumb and you then have to call him an idiot.

Ruined any chance that a quality discussion on the subject could have been had by you two on the subject that would have beneficial.


Now as for the stats I provide the following:

These are the stats for Romo, Manning, Rodgers, Brees, and Brady over the last 4 full seasons. Brady and Romo have both missed significant time in a season a piece so I went with 4 to be on even seasons with all 4 players.


68.9 4806 50td 8 int 21 sacks
65.7 4398 28 td 13 int 16 sacks
65.9 3900 36 td 4 int 25 sacks
65.6 5235 39 td 12 int 32 sacks


67.5 4423 28td 18 int 16 sacks
65.0 5069 34 td 17 int 13 sacks
68.1 4620 33 td 22 int 25 sacks
71.2 5476 39 ts 12 ints 24 sacks


64.4 4211 36td 19 int 24 sacks
61.3 3448 26td 14 int 20 sacks
63.1 4483 26 td 9 int 34 sacks
66.3 4184 31 td 10 int 36 sacks


63.6 4038 28 td 13 int 34 sacks
64.7 4434 30 td 7 int 50 sacks
65.7 3122 28 td 11 int 31 sacks
68.3 4643 45 td 6 ints 36 sacks

56.1 3336 23td 20 int 27 sacks
60.3 3238 21td 10 int 27 sacks
62.9 4002 31 td 25 int 16 sacks
61.0 4933 29 td 16 int 28 sacks



That's the stats of the guys who've pretty much been argued as the top 4 or 5 QBs along with Romo. Now look at those numbers and tell me whose who without having to look it up.


I noticed you mentioned the 4000 yards, below that being a down year for them and 4000 being a great year for Romo....well as you can see, if you know which ones are his, he obviously does that quite regularly as well.

Ok I'm done with this. Not going to continue this agruement, its clearly pointless. Im not going to argue with anyone who really thinks Romo is actuallly on the level of Brees, Brady, Manning, or Rodgers.

[gmoney112]

Ok I'm done with this. Not going to continue this agruement, its clearly pointless. Im not going to argue with anyone who really thinks Romo is actuallly on the level of Brees, Brady, Manning, or Rodgers.

He just crapped all over you with your own argument. Talk about a rightful pwning.

[BraveHeartFan]

Ok I'm done with this. Not going to continue this agruement, its clearly pointless. Im not going to argue with anyone who really thinks Romo is actuallly on the level of Brees, Brady, Manning, or Rodgers.

Typical and expected response.

[tm1119]

He just crapped all over you with your own argument. Talk about a rightful pwning.

Yup he "pwned" me. Cool.

I just pray none of u ever try to make this argument in public outside of the state of Texas. I don't think you'll be able to deal with the humiliation that follows.

[ringmaster]

First he said you were truly blind.

He didnt' call you names. He didn't resort to giving you some tag of homer or realist or any of that other crap. He said you were blind, in his opinion, for not seeing how good Romo is.

You took that and immediately called him a homer for it to which he resorted in a childish way by calling you dumb and you then have to call him an idiot.

Ruined any chance that a quality discussion on the subject could have been had by you two on the subject that would have beneficial.


Now as for the stats I provide the following:

These are the stats for Romo, Manning, Rodgers, Brees, and Brady over the last 4 full seasons. Brady and Romo have both missed significant time in a season a piece so I went with 4 to be on even seasons with all 4 players.


68.9 4806 50td 8 int 21 sacks
65.7 4398 28 td 13 int 16 sacks
65.9 3900 36 td 4 int 25 sacks
65.6 5235 39 td 12 int 32 sacks


67.5 4423 28td 18 int 16 sacks
65.0 5069 34 td 17 int 13 sacks
68.1 4620 33 td 22 int 25 sacks
71.2 5476 39 ts 12 ints 24 sacks


64.4 4211 36td 19 int 24 sacks
61.3 3448 26td 14 int 20 sacks
63.1 4483 26 td 9 int 34 sacks
66.3 4184 31 td 10 int 36 sacks


63.6 4038 28 td 13 int 34 sacks
64.7 4434 30 td 7 int 50 sacks
65.7 3122 28 td 11 int 31 sacks
68.3 4643 45 td 6 ints 36 sacks

56.1 3336 23td 20 int 27 sacks
60.3 3238 21td 10 int 27 sacks
62.9 4002 31 td 25 int 16 sacks
61.0 4933 29 td 16 int 28 sacks



That's the stats of the guys who've pretty much been argued as the top 4 or 5 QBs along with Romo. Now look at those numbers and tell me whose who without having to look it up.


I noticed you mentioned the 4000 yards, below that being a down year for them and 4000 being a great year for Romo....well as you can see, if you know which ones are his, he obviously does that quite regularly as well.

You also mentioned 35 TDs....as you can see all the numbers here they all missed that mark at least 1 time and one of them, whose a across the board top 3 QB has missed it 3 times. Then you have the other guy whose NEVER thrown for 35 TDs (i'll give you a hint, that one ain't Romo), and yet he's considered one of the top 5 QBs.

So, please, try and tell me again how his stats don't stack up with those guys.


You mentioned your 4000 yards and 35 tds and I quickly dispelled those as false so whats next on the excuse list for how his numbers don't stack up against theirs?Ouch Brave you hit him below the belt with that one great work.:bow:

[BraveHeartFan]

Yup he "pwned" me. Cool.

I just pray none of u ever try to make this argument in public outside of the state of Texas. I don't think you'll be able to deal with the humiliation that follows.

I do already. I live outside of the state of Texas.

I've never had to worry about humiliation because I don't make silly claims like 4000 yards and 35 TDs is a down year for these guys and a great year for Romo when all I have to do is actually *GASP* read the stats and realise that what you said is wrong on every possible level.

You're just mad because you opened your mouth, spouted off (in this case via keyboard) a bunch of junk that you clearly didn't know what you were talking about on and it came back and bit you in the backside.

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.

Credibility gone. :laugh2:

As for the trade no I wouldn't trade a proven elite QB like Romo for an unproven QB like Luck. Luck could be the next Peyton Manning or the next Ryan Leaf we just don't know.

[CATCH17]

:lmao2:

Saying he would do it right now is a stretch but both of those guys have incredible potential.

Especially Griffin.

[tm1119]

I do already. I live outside of the state of Texas.

I've never had to worry about humiliation because I don't make silly claims like 4000 yards and 35 TDs is a down year for these guys and a great year for Romo when all I have to do is actually *GASP* read the stats and realise that what you said is wrong on every possible level.

You're just mad because you opened your mouth, spouted off (in this case via keyboard) a bunch of junk that you clearly didn't know what you were talking about on and it came back and bit you in the backside.

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong, but its cool Ill let you feel like you win. This argument is so ridiculous that its not worth my time. No real NFL fan that isnt blinded by their homerism would put Romo anywhere near the same level at Rodgers, Brees, Brady, or Manning. So the fact that you do completely discredits anything you have to say about the matter.

And I hope that was another typical response that you were expecting.

So just for laughs can we put up our top 10 NFL QB's? List 1-10 the guys you would want on your team next year that would give you the best chance at a super bowl. I'll go 1st....

1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Eli
5. Big Ben
6. Romo
7. Rivers
8. Stafford
9. Ryan
10. Schaub

[burmafrd]

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong, but its cool Ill let you feel like you win. This argument is so ridiculous that its not worth my time. No real NFL fan that isnt blinded by their homerism would put Romo anywhere near the same level at Rodgers, Brees, Brady, or Manning. So the fact that you do completely discredits anything you have to say about the matter.

And I hope that was another typical response that you were expecting.

So just for laughs can we put up our top 10 NFL QB's? List 1-10 the guys you would want on your team next year that would give you the best chance at a super bowl. I'll go 1st....

1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Eli
5. Big Ben
6. Romo
7. Rivers
8. Stafford
9. Ryan
10. Schaub

you are the gomer that said you would take Luck or III over Romo right now.
For all their potential, neither one has played in the probowl. Romo has. So right there what little credibility you had disapeared

[tm1119]

you are the gomer that said you would take Luck or III over Romo right now.
For all their potential, neither one has played in the probowl. Romo has. So right there what little credibility you had disapeared

I've seen what Romo can do. He's good, but he's not a guy who can put a team on his back to a superbowl. If I have a chance to get a young qb with star potential I would take it. Sure its a gamble, but QB's like Luck and RG3 don't come along that often.

[burmafrd]

I've seen what Romo can do. He's good, but he's not a guy who can put a team on his back to a superbowl. If I have a chance to get a young qb with star potential I would take it. Sure its a gamble, but QB's like Luck and RG3 don't come along that often.


you are hopeless.

[Risen Star]

Saying he would do it right now is a stretch but both of those guys have incredible potential.

Especially Griffin.

Luck has more potential than Griffin.

That's why he'll be the slam dunk, take it to the bank, 1st overall pick. His skill set is superior.

[Tricericon]

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong, but its cool Ill let you feel like you win. This argument is so ridiculous that its not worth my time. No real NFL fan that isnt blinded by their homerism would put Romo anywhere near the same level at Rodgers, Brees, Brady, or Manning. So the fact that you do completely discredits anything you have to say about the matter.

And I hope that was another typical response that you were expecting.

So just for laughs can we put up our top 10 NFL QB's? List 1-10 the guys you would want on your team next year that would give you the best chance at a super bowl. I'll go 1st....

1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Eli
5. Big Ben
6. Romo
7. Rivers
8. Stafford
9. Ryan
10. Schaub

...and then you don't have Manning in your top 10? :laugh2:

[cds99]

In a minute I would for luck, not for rg3 though

[BraveHeartFan]

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong, but its cool Ill let you feel like you win. This argument is so ridiculous that its not worth my time. No real NFL fan that isnt blinded by their homerism would put Romo anywhere near the same level at Rodgers, Brees, Brady, or Manning. So the fact that you do completely discredits anything you have to say about the matter.

And I hope that was another typical response that you were expecting.

So just for laughs can we put up our top 10 NFL QB's? List 1-10 the guys you would want on your team next year that would give you the best chance at a super bowl. I'll go 1st....

1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Eli
5. Big Ben
6. Romo
7. Rivers
8. Stafford
9. Ryan
10. Schaub

Sure I will. No problem.

First I'll say this. You assume to much. I never said he was those guys, or is those guys, or anything. I simply pointed out that what you said to back up your 'opinion' of him was wrong and I more than proved what you said was wrong.

As usual with people who don't think, at all, before they post something like "4000 yards and 35 seasons would be a great year for Romo", implying he's never thrown for 4000 yards or that those other guys routinely throw for 35 or more TDs (Both of which were proven, very easily, to be dead wrong), they then turn to the tried and true thing of calling someone a homer.

I don't need you to let me do anything. You've proven, multiple times now, that you didn't know what you were talking about, spouted off complete crap that was false, and when I posted stuff proving you wrong and challenged you on it you went to the tag lining and back pedaling of how you weren't going to so this or that.

Why? It's quite simple really. You had nothing to stand on. Your only defense of your opinion on said topic was the comment about the stats which was quickly, and easily, proven to be dead wrong so you've immediately turtled. Which is fine because it's completely expected.


Now for your question.


1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Tom Brady
3. Drew Brees
4. Peyton Manning (Under the assumption at this point that he's 100% healthy)
5. Eli Manning
6. Tony Romo
7. Big Ben
8. Matt Ryan
9. Phillip Rivers
10. Matt Shaub

[BraveHeartFan]

Huh, look at that, Romo ranked in the same place...interesting. THe only difference is I was able to back up my claim, where you couldn't, and still had him exactly where you believe he should be ranked as well.

But hey I guess it's better to back pedal and throw out 'homer' tag lines while assuming you know what someone thinks instead of simply admitting you opened your mouth with a comment that was wrong and that you had nothing else to back said opinion up with other than "I'm not getting into this".

Thanks for playing.

[DFWJC]

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong, but its cool Ill let you feel like you win. This argument is so ridiculous that its not worth my time. No real NFL fan that isnt blinded by their homerism would put Romo anywhere near the same level at Rodgers, Brees, Brady, or Manning. So the fact that you do completely discredits anything you have to say about the matter.

And I hope that was another typical response that you were expecting.

So just for laughs can we put up our top 10 NFL QB's? List 1-10 the guys you would want on your team next year that would give you the best chance at a super bowl. I'll go 1st....

1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Eli
5. Big Ben
6. Romo
7. Rivers
8. Stafford
9. Ryan
10. Schaub
hey tm
It looks like you rank Romo as fairly elite--certainly he would be near the bottom of the list of players that need replacing.

So why would you sell the farm to get rid of him for what very easily may not be an upgrade and could even be a big downgrade?

[rantanamo]

The truth is neither of you know the right answer. It actually is a tough call. Pretty good qb vs starting over with a potentially great qb. It is both possible that Romo has gone as far as he can while also possible that he takes the Boys even further. Its also possible the team is a steady, heady hand away from doing what it possibly can. You just don't know.

[silverbear]

would u give romo and a 1st and 2nd round pick for andrew luck??

Not only no, but hell no...

Here's betting that a lot of people who answer this question in the affirmative are the same ones who sneered at the Roy Williams trade, saying "you don't give up multiple high picks for any player"...

[silverbear]

Hate to brake it to you but Romo is pretty far from great. Hes good but great is a strong word that doesnt apply to many, and Romo just isnt in that class.

Id take both Luck and RG3 over Romo right now no doubt.

OK, now I know what your opinion's worth... thanks, I won't waste my time taking you seriously...

[silverbear]

Yup blinded by our 1 playoff win....Im not a Romo hater and Im fine with the fact that he isnt going anywhere.

And of course, quarterbacks and quarterbacks alone determine who wins playoff games...

Tony's "only" the second rated passer ALL TIME, at 96.9... he's "only" led the team to 14 game-winning drvies in the 4th quarter, and another 13 in which he's led them to retake the lead, only to have the team subsequently lose the game... all this in just 77 career starts...

He's "only" completed nearly 65 per cent of his passes for his career (64.5, to be exact), and he's "only" thrown a little over 2 TD passes for every int he's thrown (149 to 72)... he's "only" averaging 8.0 yards per attempt for his career, ranking 5th in NFL history in that stat...

Yup, I think the word "great" is appropriate when talking about Tony Romo, and I question the football knowledge of anybody who'd disagree with that...

[silverbear]

There is no argument. Do I really need to bring up Romo's stats VS the top 4 QB's in the league? Do I have to bring up the lack winning in his career? I thought it was all very obvious and unnecessary.

No, you don't need to bring up anything else... we all know you now for what you are... the word "clueless" comes to mind...

But I will say one thing, it's completely RIDICULOUS to base an argument on "Romo's stats vs. the top 4 QBs in the league"... Romo's not playing against those quarterbacks, he's playing against their team's defense... and those top 4 QBs aren't playing against Romo, they're playing against our defense...

Ahhh, why am I wasting my time, I doubt you're capable of being educated...

[silverbear]

Ok I'm done with this. Not going to continue this agruement, its clearly pointless.

You're wise to run from your asinine argument...

Im not going to argue with anyone who really thinks Romo is actuallly on the level of Brees, Brady, Manning, or Rodgers.

Career stats say he is... but hell, what's statistical fact, compared to your opinion??

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...

[silverbear]

Yup he "pwned" me. Cool.

I thought you were done with this... :D

I just pray none of u ever try to make this argument in public outside of the state of Texas.

I'll make my argument with any fool who tries to deny Romo's ability... your problem is you've mistakem team success (or failure) for individual success...

I don't think you'll be able to deal with the humiliation that follows.

Only one being humiliated here is you, hoss... you have crapped embarrassment all over yourself...

[TheSport78]

Yes, I would give up a 1st and 2nd rounder for Luck. I love Romo but I wouldn't even think twice about it. Luck's the best QB prospect to come out in years, and Romo has what, 3, 4 or 5 years left?

[silverbear]

Again, not gonna go there. Youre wrong

Says the clueless fan who has just shredded his credibility...

[silverbear]

I've seen what Romo can do. He's good, but he's not a guy who can put a team on his back to a superbowl. If I have a chance to get a young qb with star potential I would take it. Sure its a gamble, but QB's like Luck and RG3 don't come along that often.

And you think that Luck or Griffin could take this team to a Super Bowl??

Mercy, it's getting hard to get mad at you, because you're just so COMICAL...

Be advised that no knowledgeable fan frequenting this forum will ever take you seriously again...

[silverbear]

Huh, look at that, Romo ranked in the same place...interesting. THe only difference is I was able to back up my claim, where you couldn't, and still had him exactly where you believe he should be ranked as well.

Braveheart, he's afflicted with the peculiar form of arrogance that tells him his position is beyond debate, simply because it's his... it doesn't matter what the facts say, he's right, and that's that...

This whole thread has been kind of like watching a train wreck; it's fascinating, in a grotesque way...

Another symptom of this is grandly announcing that you're done with the argument, then cranking out response after response after that announcment. he simply has to get the last word in... :D

[Romo 2 Austin]

I would give alot more than that.

[Avery]

For Luck, yes. For Griffin, no.

There are no sure fire guarantees in the draft, but Luck is as close as you can get to one.

[the_h0wey]

would u give romo and a 1st and 2nd round pick for andrew luck??


Romo or Luck?

I would say Romo has clearly had a better NFL career than Luck has had up to this point in time.

[cruz_aedo861]

Look luck is the highest rated qb since elway he is a close to a can't miss as you can get in the NFL. But he can still miss. And it will take so much to get him away from the colts it is not even worth thinking about. It will take like this years whole draft plus next year 1st 2nd 3rd. Throw out the draft pick value trade chart it will take a kings ransom plus some to pry luck away from the colts. The NFL draft is all about timing and for luck to the cowboys the timing is just off by a mile.