Micky......... - Dallas Cowboys Forum

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Why the need to talk down what Romo did last night? He says he's not comfortable with Romo as the backup......well.....who does he want as the backup? He was talking about Romo being at Eastern Illinois.....so what?

**BrAinPaiNt** · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimz31

Why the need to talk down what Romo did last night? He says he's not comfortable with Romo as the backup......well.....who does he want as the backup? He was talking about Romo being at Eastern Illinois.....so what?

I didn't see a problem with what he said myself.

Romo looked good yet at the same time he was going against backups in a situation where there was no blitzing or complicated defenses involved.

He has only gotten time in pre-season games.

He is a young UNDRAFTED QB that went to a small school.

Many would feel more comfortable with a cheap veteran backup instead of two untested young qbs with limited exp., especially when you are starting an old QB.

Once again I think many Should question it or at the very least be a little concerned...but hey that is just me.

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrAinPaiNt

I didn't see a problem with what he said myself.

Romo looked good yet at the same time he was going against backups in a situation where there was no blitzing or complicated defenses involved.

He has only gotten time in pre-season games.

He is a young UNDRAFTED QB that went to a small school.

Many would feel more comfortable with a cheap veteran backup instead of two untested young qbs with limited exp., especially when you are starting an old QB.

Once again I think many Should question it or at the very least be a little concerned...but hey that is just me.

Romo went against backups.....so did Henson. I would feel more comfortable with a proven backup in there as well. I just don't see why Micky essentially rained on Romo's parade.

It seems to me that Micky is already jumping on the Henson band-wagon like he was with Hutchinson.

Romo looked every bit like an NFL QB last night. In fact, I think he looked better than VT last night. VT's release is REALLY slow compared to Romo's.

I wish I would have seen Romo play in college......that way, I could determine if we should throw him in the Hall of Fame right now or not.

dbair1967 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimz31

Romo went against backups.....so did Henson. I would feel more comfortable with a proven backup in there as well. I just don't see why Micky essentially rained on Romo's parade.

It seems to me that Micky is already jumping on the Henson band-wagon like he was with Hutchinson.

Romo looked every bit like an NFL QB last night. In fact, I think he looked better than VT last night. VT's release is REALLY slow compared to Romo's.

I wish I would have seen Romo play in college......that way, I could determine if we should throw him in the Hall of Fame right now or not.

Romo looked like in a pinch, he might could do ok for us...the one difference though between Romo and Henson "going against the backups" Romo got to play with the 1st team OL, both starting TE's and Antonio Bryant, whereas Henson has not gotten a single rep I recall with the starting OL...it would have been nice if at some point in the preseason Henson would have gotten the benefit of playing with most of the starting lineup

I'm fine with the backup QB's we have though and dont see why we need a veteran backup

David

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbair1967

Romo looked like in a pinch, he might could do ok for us...the one difference though between Romo and Henson "going against the backups" Romo got to play with the 1st team OL, both starting TE's and Antonio Bryant, whereas Henson has not gotten a single rep I recall with the starting OL...it would have been nice if at some point in the preseason Henson would have gotten the benefit of playing with most of the starting lineup

I'm fine with the backup QB's we have though and dont see why we need a veteran backup

David

Well....in his first and only chance to play with the starting OL as well as both starting TE's and AB.....he looked liked an all-pro QB. Who's to say he couldn't play like this all the time?

**BrAinPaiNt** · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimz31

Romo went against backups.....so did Henson. I would feel more comfortable with a proven backup in there as well. I just don't see why Micky essentially rained on Romo's parade.

It seems to me that Micky is already jumping on the Henson band-wagon like he was with Hutchinson.

Romo looked every bit like an NFL QB last night. In fact, I think he looked better than VT last night. VT's release is REALLY slow compared to Romo's.

I wish I would have seen Romo play in college......that way, I could determine if we should throw him in the Hall of Fame right now or not.

Yes and Henson looked better then Romo in other games and Vinny looked better then both in other games.

Once again it is preseason and when you have two untested QBs with no exp in a regular season game....I still see no reason that it is wrong to question an Undrafted QB from a small school.

I think you just do not like Mickey, not that there is anything wrong with that, and about anything he says is going to grate on your nerves.

Once again I seen nothing wrong with what he said.

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrAinPaiNt

Yes and Henson looked better then Romo in other games and Vinny looked better then both in other games.

Once again it is preseason and when you have two untested QBs with no exp in a regular season game....I still see no reason that it is wrong to question an Undrafted QB from a small school.

I think you just do not like Mickey, not that there is anything wrong with that, and about anything he says is going to grate on your nerves.

Once again I seen nothing wrong with what he said.

It's fine to question a player from a small school.....but don't play down what he did like he can't keep doing it due to the "school" that he went to. That is just plain stupid. Like ONLY players from the big schools make it in the NFL. Was it HIS fault that they didn't blitz him to the extent Micky thought there should have been? How much did the blitz VT? How much was Romo blitzed in previous games....how much was Henson blitzed in previous games?

kmd24 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrAinPaiNt

Once again it is preseason and when you have two untested QBs with no exp in a regular season game....I still see no reason that it is wrong to question an Undrafted QB from a small school.

If it's not wrong to question Romo as the backup, it wouldn't have been wrong to question CHutch as the backup last year, yet Spags did not do that.

Romo's football pedigree at this point is better than Hutch's was last year at the same point. Hutch had also not had as good an outing last preseason as Romo did last night.

Mick is paid to give his opinion, and I have no problem with that, but you have to admit there sometimes seems to be some inconsistency in his point of view.

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by kmd24

If it's not wrong to question Romo as the backup, it wouldn't have been wrong to question CHutch as the backup last year, yet Spags did not do that.

Romo's football pedigree at this point is better than Hutch's was last year at the same point. Hutch had also not had as good an outing last preseason as Romo did last night.

Mick is paid to give his opinion, and I have no problem with that, but you have to admit there sometimes seems to be some inconsistency in his point of view.

Exactly.

How many times did he say, "Well, so-and-so wasn't blitzing when Henson/VT was in there...." or even question the sanity of having a number 2 QB a person that has been away from the game for a long time? In fact, I think that Mick wants Henson as the #2 guy, and he would probably use the college he attended as a reason or something.

If Henson is the future, I can see the logic in starting him right now.....although a case can be made against it as well.

Nobody knows about Henson.....JUST THE SAME AS they don't know about Romo as well.

adbutcher · 09-03-2004

Mickey is joke, How many people caught his Chad reference? Another thing I notice, Mickey is shorter than a midget on his knees, that might explain his complex problem.

Erik_H · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by kmd24

If it's not wrong to question Romo as the backup, it wouldn't have been wrong to question CHutch as the backup last year, yet Spags did not do that.

Romo's football pedigree at this point is better than Hutch's was last year at the same point. Hutch had also not had as good an outing last preseason as Romo did last night.

Mick is paid to give his opinion, and I have no problem with that, but you have to admit there sometimes seems to be some inconsistency in his point of view.

Wow. I read this thread and I can hardly believe what I'm seeing. Do my eyes deceive me? The lines are forming and it's starting to look like the Q/Hutch debates are rising again. Only with different names. I can almost see an Mickey playing the usher directing people.

"Former Quincians to the left please, over in the Romo section. All Hutchites please step to the Henson section to the right...."

As I see it, Mickey isn't paid to give his opinion, he's paid to stir up debate. I can almost see Mick grinning as he fans the flames.

I may be put off at times by his "I told you so" writing style, but I must give credit where credit is due. The man knows how to do his job. He's not here to be liked, he's here to raise interest in the Cowboys and have people talking about something.

If everyone agreed, things would get dull (see our CB situation, everyone knows we're in need of imporvment, what's left to say?), so Mick drops an opinion on something that clearly has room to be interpreted two ways.

**ABQCOWBOY** · 09-03-2004

The question is a valid one.

Hutchinson or Carter or whomever else gets interjected into this conversation is irrelivant. There gone.

We have VT, Romo and Henson.

I'm in favor of a Vet but if we don't bring one in, then it's Romo or Henson. I trust BPs decision, whatever it is but if I had to pick between the two, I'd probably go with Henson. If I evaluate all 4 games, I think Henson has performed better over all. I also think that players only get better if they play. The 3rd QB doesn't get any action during the season. As I recall, they practice by throwing footballs into trash cans or some such thing. Henson has the bigger upside. He has shown the most progress of any of the QBs and so, I would go with him. Not very scientific I grant you but then again, not everything is a scientific experiment. Some things are just commen sense. That's how I see this.

chinch · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by kmd24

If it's not wrong to question Romo as the backup, it wouldn't have been wrong to question CHutch as the backup last year, yet Spags did not do that.

Romo's football pedigree at this point is better than Hutch's was last year at the same point. Hutch had also not had as good an outing last preseason as Romo did last night.

Mick is paid to give his opinion, and I have no problem with that, but you have to admit there sometimes seems to be some inconsistency in his point of view.

well said. (thankfully we don't get "mickey" on the radio here in NJ

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik_H

Wow. I read this thread and I can hardly believe what I'm seeing. Do my eyes deceive me? The lines are forming and it's starting to look like the Q/Hutch debates are rising again. Only with different names. I can almost see an Mickey playing the usher directing people.

"Former Quincians to the left please, over in the Romo section. All Hutchites please step to the Henson section to the right...."

As I see it, Mickey isn't paid to give his opinion, he's paid to stir up debate. I can almost see Mick grinning as he fans the flames.

I may be put off at times by his "I told you so" writing style, but I must give credit where credit is due. The man knows how to do his job. He's not here to be liked, he's here to raise interest in the Cowboys and have people talking about something.

[View Full Quote]

There are plenty of "Quincians" in the Henson camp.....some that want him to start right now and some that want to ease him into the position. The same for the "Hutchites"

I said long ago that there would be debates on the QB starter....although I actually thought it was going to be between Henson and VT.....not Henson and Romo. I don't think the debates will be as pronounced as the previous debates though.

You say "give credit where credit is due", yet Micky can't even do that which is what I was saying.

Jimz31 · 09-03-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

The question is a valid one.

Hutchinson or Carter or whomever else gets interjected into this conversation is irrelivant. There gone.

We have VT, Romo and Henson.

I'm in favor of a Vet but if we don't bring one in, then it's Romo or Henson. I trust BPs decision, whatever it is but if I had to pick between the two, I'd probably go with Henson. If I evaluate all 4 games, I think Henson has performed better over all. I also think that players only get better if they play. The 3rd QB doesn't get any action during the season. As I recall, they practice by throwing footballs into trash cans or some such thing. Henson has the bigger upside. He has shown the most progress of any of the QBs and so, I would go with him. Not very scientific I grant you but then again, not everything is a scientific experiment. Some things are just commen sense. That's how I see this.

Although, looking at stats doesn't support your evaluation.....either does points scored.