A perspective on Romo's career to the DC and NFL

[MileyDancer]

And Miles Austin, Cole Beasley, Dez Bryant, and Sam Hurd.

And how much does Witten owe his success to Romo?

And Laurent Robinson

 

[diefree666]

And Laurent Robinson

I have not heard if robinson is over his concussion problems. Its been a few years. He owes his entire financial security to tony.

 

[Gameover]

Now this is the definition of stupid

Learn to disagree without the insults

Anderson was a 4 time passing champion

Had a career completion percentage of nearly 60. Staubach's was 57

He is an underrated but very dominant player in his era. Silly to compare totals w a guy from this era. His numbers would equate to something like: 56,000 yards, 65% completion, 390 TD in today's era.

Love it or leave it

 

[waving monkey]

If only the great Danny White had gotten the same treatment.

We've lowered our standards!

The ole "we've lowered our standards" lament, lol

 

[diefree666]

F-U

that truly defines your intelligence

 

[DFWJC]

Unfortunately I don’t see Romo getting in the HOF, not enough post season success to get in. He has nice stats, but most HOF QB at least reach a Championship game or Super Bowl.

I dont remotely blame Romo for that, but I do mostly agree with you.
It'll be tough for specifically a QB to get in the HOF with Romo and team's lack of postseason success.
His postseason play was ok in general, but not enough opportunities or deep playoff quality teams to get that breakthrough year.

 

[Gameover]

Learn to disagree without the insults

Anderson was a 4 time passing champion

Had a career completion percentage of nearly 60. Staubach's was 57

He is an underrated but very dominant player in his era. Silly to compare totals w a guy from this era. His numbers would equate to something like: 56,000 yards, 65% completion, 390 TD in today's era.

Love it or leave it

He actually might be a top 7 QB all time.

The numbers he put up in that era are equivalent to the numbers Marino , Favre, Manning, Brees and Brady have done in recent times.

Im stupid:https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/06/08/ken-anderson

 

[Bullflop]

A man doesn't need to be enshrined in the Hall of Fame to be great. Romo is and always has been great. The HOF couldn't define him, whether he were to be enshrined in it or not. The measure of a man is far more than just about football. Tony Romo fits the bill of greatness in enough ways to qualify, hands down, in many highly valued respects, imho. Those who know him best hold him in the highest of regards.

 

[garyo1954]

Anderson was more dominant in his era than Romo was in his. I would put in Anderson over Aikman and Irvin.

What are you talking about 'more dominant?'

I saw Ken Anderson play. With my own eyes. He wasn't Joe Montana. He wasn't Don Meredith. Frankly, I don't remember much about him and I was living in Dayton, Ohio watching Bengals games. Nobody was saying "Oh, oh the Bengals and Ken Anderson are playing at Riverfront, let's book down and catch Ken Anderson playing."

I was in Dayton when the Freezer Game was played and we sat around laughing at the idiots in the stands with no shirts in -57 degree weather!

The league didn't fear Ken Anderson. No.....didn't happen.

The other QB in that game he was one of the league's dominant passers.....oh yeah! You ever heard of Dan Fouts?

 

[garyo1954]

He actually might be a top 7 QB all time.

The numbers he put up in that era are equivalent to the numbers Marino , Favre, Manning, Brees and Brady have done in recent times.

I showed you his career numbers which are lower than Romo's in every category. If you want to go purely by numbers Romo is the clear winner.

Mic drop.

 

[Gameover]

I showed you his career numbers which are lower than Romo's in every category. If you want to go purely by numbers Romo is the clear winner.

Mic drop.

You really comparing passing totals from 1 guy who played in the 70's and mid 80's vs a guy who played in the 2000's and 10's? That's a fare fight. A bum like Stafford would win that. You have to compare how dominant each was in their perspective eras. Anderson was more dominant in his.

Educate yourself:https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/06/08/ken-anderson

Anderson would be amongst the Gods in this era

 

[garyo1954]

You really comparing passing totals from 1 guy who played in the 70's and mid 80's vs a guy who played in the 2000's and 10's? That's a fare fight. A bum like Stafford would win that. You have to compare how dominant each was in their perspective eras. Anderson was more dominant in his.

Educate yourself:https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/06/08/ken-anderson

Anderson would be amongst the Gods in this era

I'm talking PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

An OpEd piece in Sports Illustrated is not EDUCATIONAL reading. Especially when its to make a case that a player is HOF material. However, I refuse to call you stupid. From an old person that's still almost as smart as pouring salt in your eyes while looking at the sun.

And Romo PLAYED LESS GAMES. But.....

We can do your way....

How about we compare Ken Anderson to Joe Montana (who would be in the top 3/4 all time), Dan Fouts (who he played in the Freezer Game...he finished his career with more than 40,000 yards), Marino (first year was in that era), and just go ahead and define what 'a real era of football' is and we can look at the numbers.

Let's educate you.

(LOL...I just read i and laughed at you again. He's running the West Coast offense? Why doesn't he have Joe Montana numbers? Hmmmm?)

 

[Gameover]

I'm talking PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

An OpEd piece in Sports Illustrated is not EDUCATIONAL reading. Especially when its to make a case that a player is HOF material. However, I refuse to call you stupid. From an old person that's still almost as smart as pouring salt in your eyes while looking at the sun.

And Romo PLAYED LESS GAMES. But.....

We can do your way....

How about we compare Ken Anderson to Joe Montana (who would be in the top 3/4 all time), Dan Fouts (who he played in the Freezer Game...he finished his career with more than 40,000 yards), Marino (first year was in that era), and just go ahead and define what 'a real era of football' is and we can look at the numbers.

Let's educate you.

(LOL...I just read i and laughed at you again. He's running the West Coast offense? Why doesn't he have Joe Montana numbers? Hmmmm?)

When marveling at Anderson's Hall of Fame-worthy stats, it pays to remember that he spent much of his career playing in the depths of the Dead Ball Era (1970-77), when scoring hit its post-war low and quarterbacking was harder than at any time in the past 60 years.

Anderson, for example, led the NFL with an incredible 95.7 passer rating in 1974. Modern football fans might scoff at that number by today's gaudy standards. But consider that the league-wide passer rating in 1974 was a miniscule 64.2, one of the lowest league-wide ratings of the last 50 years.

Hell, Anderson might be the damn GOAT

I'm done. It's astounding the lack of understanding some have on this forum

 

[Jarv]

Learn to disagree without the insults

Anderson was a 4 time passing champion

Had a career completion percentage of nearly 60. Staubach's was 57

He is an underrated but very dominant player in his era. Silly to compare totals w a guy from this era. His numbers would equate to something like: 56,000 yards, 65% completion, 390 TD in today's era.

Love it or leave it

Too bad he was such a loser though.

 

[garyo1954]

When marveling at Anderson's Hall of Fame-worthy stats, it pays to remember that he spent much of his career playing in the depths of the Dead Ball Era (1970-77), when scoring hit its post-war low and quarterbacking was harder than at any time in the past 60 years.

Anderson, for example, led the NFL with an incredible 95.7 passer rating in 1974. Modern football fans might scoff at that number by today's gaudy standards. But consider that the league-wide passer rating in 1974 was a miniscule 64.2, one of the lowest league-wide ratings of the last 50 years.

Hell, Anderson might be the damn GOAT

I'm done. It's astounding the lack of understanding some have on this forum

I'm totally astounded that you make such a ludicrous claim based on an OpEd written in Sports Illustrated in 2011.
And you won't even define 'a real era of football,' yet blame others for not understanding what you are trying to say?

Maybe if you made your meaning clear.......hmmmm?

Here's a thought:

Find any listing of top ten all time NFL quarterbacks with Ken Anderson on it.

(If you'd accept the top 100 list, Ken Anderson is rated at number 20 behind 19 Terry Bradshaw, 18 Warren Moon, 17 Len Dawson, 16 Sonny Jurgensen, 12 Dan Fouts, and a bunch of other QBs you wouldn't know because Sports Illustrated didn't do an OpEd on them.

But he's ahead of 21 Drew Brees if that makes you happy.)

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/507359-the-top-100-quarterbacks-in-nfl-history

 

[lostar2009]

He was nothing before Romo, and nothing after he left.

I believe he was still solid when he left.

 

[erod]

I believe he was still solid when he left.

San Diego would disagree.

 

[xwalker]

I was always a big Romo fan, but he's not sniffing the Hall of Fame. To get in as a QB you need all-time stat totals (total yards/total touchdowns) or championships, and Romo has neither.

Between not starting in his first couple years and time lost to injury, he couldn't get the former.

He couldn't get the latter because the Cowboys are a clown show organization headed by an old drunk who cosplays as a real GM. No amount of Johnnie Walker Blue is a substitute for being qualified.



White shouldn't have been crapped on by everyone at the time like he was. "Not being Roger ******* Staubach" doesn't make you human garbage, but Cowboys fans and the Dallas sports media acted like it did.



He has championships won against the only dynasty team of this millennium. Like it or not he's getting in.

His stats are good and better than Aikman, Kurt Warner and some other HOF QBs.

The stats not overwhelming enough like Marino's to overcome the lack of championships.

 

[Diehardblues]

I’ve always said history will probably reflect more favorably on Romo’s career as we were so caught up in the emotion of the day.

There’s another thread about the teams which won the most games during Romo era and Cowboys are like 5th or 6th. But of course we are only team without any championship pedigree amongst those.

As we see Romo made names out of recievers who otherwise wouldn’t have been known and were seeing now with our current situation just how much Romo carried our team.

We have recievers now who we’re ready to dump and reshuffle because of their less effectiveness since Romo’s departure.

I believe Romo’s legacy will be the best Cowboy QB in the worst Cowboys era. He basically kept a poorly built team from 2009 on especially on defense and mostly untalented team relevant most of his career.

He had two windows to get it done . In 2007 at the beginning of his career starting and 2014 near the end. Those were only teams that had the potential of going deeper. The 8-8 seasons might have been his greatest achievements in his prime which was wasted. We can thank Jerry who we also can thank for cutting Romo’s career short.

2014 turned out to be his crowning moment when everyone finally saw his value that he was more than enough with a team around him. I was often a critic of Romo early on but with our current situation see each week what we’ve lost. Sometimes you don’t know what you have until you’ve lost it .

 

[Brooksey]

Romo has top 5 all-time numbers in QB rating and completion percentage. He'll will not make the HOF because of the lack of post-season success. He has a second chance as a player/announcer