BR: Tony Romo Has Not Only Been the Best Version of Himself, He Might Be the NFL MVP

[rcaldw]

Less is more with Romo. I've been saying that for a long time.



YR

The worst thing that happened to Tony Romo is Jerry Jones. Jerry is the one who has made it ALL about Romo. Romo needed what we have seen this year. He NEEDS a strong running game. He NEEDS to manage the game and make the efficient, clutch, throws when the game calls for it. He DOES NOT NEED to try and carry this team or any team. Romo is a top tier QB, and we have the perfect mix right now.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Saying we should trade Romo:

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/reca...on-galloway-show-w-audio.164530/#post-2999283

Blatantly taken out of context.

My point was the same as Avezzano’s, at that time it would best for *Romo* and the Cowboys to part ways because Romo wasn’t getting the help he needed (particularly from the coaching staff) and every time he screwed up, even if it wasn’t his fault, he was suddenly the worst QB ever. It was clearly playing into his psyche and on the team’s psyche and that he could win elsewhere with better coaching and a defense that didn’t put him in situations where you can possibly fail.

Saying it was a "horrendous" move to extend Romo.

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/pat-picked-up-jimmy-garoppolo.289310/#post-5540867

Again, taken out of context (you have a real faculty for doing that). At the *rate* we extended him, it was a horrendous move. He is a QB in his 30’s that had years left on his contract and had only won 1 playoff victory. Yet, we were willing to pay him far more than he would’ve gotten on the open market (which was still a couple of years away when he’s not getting any younger). And there was the idea that Jerry kept pitching of Romo playing until he’s 40.

If Andrew Luck was extended for $200 million when the Colts could get him for $120 million, it would be a horrendous move to extend Luck at that rate.

And I never said he was a ‘bad QB’ or ‘we need to get rid of him’ either. But, don’t let facts get in the way of your vendetta.

Saying you can't deal with a QB that "doesn't understand basic situational football" and calling Romo supporters "blind":

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/tony...ature-emasculation.242093/page-3#post-4702568

Yep,
Never said he was a ‘bad QB’ and never said ‘we must get rid of him.’
You like to make things up.
Y’know who also said he didn’t understand ‘basic situational football?’ Jimmy Johnson and Tony Dungy. Crazy, I know. Must be completely anti-Tony Romo. Maybe you should stalk them as well.

Saying Romo has "bad fundementals" that "make the O-line look bad" and needs to be "protected from himself":

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/romo-and-false-flags.298861/page-2#post-5668423

Yeah. That’s what I’ve been saying now with the ‘less is more.’
It not only applies to the pass attempts, but the audibles as well. It’s not that he can’t audible, he just audibles too often. It makes it more difficult on the O-Line. And he also has a tendency to not stick in the pocket and move around *in* the pocket and instead moves out towards the tackles which doesn’t do the O-line any favors.
Like when we played Tampa in 2011 and Romo had a wide open Miles Austin right at the goal line, but for whatever reason didn’t seen him, then for whatever reason backed up into Doug Free and then made a whirly bird escape and then finally saw Austin open and fired it for a TD. Who got all of the credit on that play? Romo. Who got all of the blame? Free. And it was Romo that made the bad play and made Free look bad. Thankfully Romo escaped and redeemed himself. But, obsequious lapdogs like yourself wouldn’t know the difference of what actually happened.

Saying that somebody has 'bad fundamentals' doesn't mean they are a 'bad player.' Lance Alworth had terrible fundamentals, but he was a Hall of Fame receiver. I guess that flies over your head.

Saying he's "nowhere near his peak anymore" (funny because this was in 2014):

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/romos-peak-already-passed.291034/page-2#post-5564385

Yup.

Still didn’t say ‘he’s a bad QB’ nor did I say ‘we should get rid of him.’
And do you really believe that Romo is at his physical peak at this point in his career? Really?
I don’t think Romo would even tell you that.
Just more reason for why less is more with Romo.

Egg on whose face?

Still on yours.
Sorry..

Didn’t say ‘he’s a bad QB’ nor did I say ‘we should get rid of him’ other than what you blatantly took out of context by saying that it would be best for *Romo* because the team was so lousy. The egg goes on the face of the person that has to resort to taking things out of context because…well, it says it all about that person.
It also goes to the person that really questions me saying that Romo is nowhere near his physical peak anymore.
I don’t think that passes the laugh test.
Sorry..

But, less is more with Romo. And I’ve been saying it for years. And now we are seeing it come into fruition. I know it really burns you to see that I was right about Romo all along. So, you can chew on that for a while.

YR

 

[ringmaster]

His o-line may be poor, but you can't say Cutler doesn't have weapons at his disposal:

Marshall
Jeffrey
Bennett
Forte

A healthy Romo would go wild with that group.

Yes Cutler did have the weapons at his disposal with that group and you're right Romo would light up the league with that type of talent couldn't agree more.

The Romo to Marshall connection would be sick and imo the Bears has the best one-two punch at WR in Marshall, and Jeffrey and that would be really unfair with a healthy Romo throwing to them but who cares about the Bears I'm happy Romo is the QB of our favorite team and will really miss him once he decide to hang up his cleats and we both know it's inevitable very soon.

 

[DFWJC]

What did his running backs have? What were their/his stats?

You probably need to ask about the defense too.
Green bay was near the top of the league in takeways and sacks that year.

But don't get me wrong, I'm not one that puts Tony up there with Rodgers. Not quite anyway.

 

[jobberone]

I think Tony has had an outstanding season. I would be more than happy to hear that he has been chosen the M.V.P. But the whole "he has done more with less" thing is just wrong.

Arguably the best offensive line in football.
The leading rusher in the NFL who is threatening 2,000 yards
The 2nd best WR in football in Dez Bryant
One of the best TE's in football in Jason Witten

I don't know what team some folks are watching.

Most don't think the offense is a problem. But the offense doesn't operate in a vacuum. I'm talking about him keeping the defense off the field and keeping the offense in the game after the defense fails. Plus, don't discount the fact this OL isn't always a bastion as far as pass blocking. Should have been more descriptive. Sry about that.

 

[CF74]

Ignorance is bliss but hey I'm not complaining, we are winning Big games these days....

 

[ringmaster]

I think Tony has had an outstanding season. I would be more than happy to hear that he has been chosen the M.V.P. But the whole "he has done more with less" thing is just wrong.

Arguably the best offensive line in football.
The leading rusher in the NFL who is threatening 2,000 yards
The 2nd best WR in football in Dez Bryant
One of the best TE's in football in Jason Witten

I don't know what team some folks are watching.

IKR he finally has an o-line that can allow him time in the pocket and the running game that Garrett coveted over the last 7 years here as HC/OC, to hear that Romo has "done more with less" is the same things we heard about Aikman in the 90s. If the Cowboys are able to win a SB with Romo, we both can guarantee that the media will start this stuff all over again saying the Cowboys won the SB inspite of Romo.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

The worst thing that happened to Tony Romo is Jerry Jones. Jerry is the one who has made it ALL about Romo. Romo needed what we have seen this year. He NEEDS a strong running game. He NEEDS to manage the game and make the efficient, clutch, throws when the game calls for it. He DOES NOT NEED to try and carry this team or any team. Romo is a top tier QB, and we have the perfect mix right now.

There are statistical splits for QB's and one thing you can see pretty clearly, there is usually a point at where the QB stops being productive when it comes to pass attempts in a game. And the offense becomes less efficient at this point. Somebody like Rodgers and Brady can throw it about 45 times and that is their cut-off point. Somebody like Roethlisberger can throw it about 32 times and that is their cut-off point. Romo's is at 36 attempts in a game. After that, his performance drops and the offense as a whole becomes stagnant.

I think there have been a lot of coaching issues, not just Jerry Jones. When Parcells had Romo, we sure didn't throw it more than 36 times in a game that often. And that running game wasn't very good either. It's just that Parcells was committed to running the ball and knew the dangers (in general, not just with Romo) of throwing the ball too much.

Part of the issues I see is that Romo was trying to emulate Brady's pocket mechanics by staying back in the pocket. The problem is that they are 2 vastly different QB's. Brady is a big guy with a classic overhand throwing style and a much bigger arm than ever given credit for. Romo is more mobile, shorter and smaller about average arm strength with a 3/4 motion. It's why Witten (or any TE) doesn't score many TD's inside the 5-yard line while Brady's TE's do. Brady can throw over the top of the linemen and Romo really can't (or not as efficiently). So, why have Romo try and use Brady's pocket mechanics?

Romo would have been better off emulating somebody like Brees who moves up and into the pocket and finds his passing lanes really well. I really believe if Payton was our coach instead of Wade and Garrett as O-C, Romo would have never tried to emulate Brady.

And then we went to heavy shotgun use and were throwing the ball 63% of the time and it made for a lot of work for little reward and hoping that everybody was consistently on the same page. Some QB's like Rodgers and Brady and Peyton can pull it off. Romo can't at the consistency they can. Doesn't make him a bad QB, it just makes him more human than those guys who are flat out incredible.

Roethlisberger is the same way and he's not nearly as good as Peyton or Rodgers, but he has more SB rings than they do.

Less is more with Tony Romo.





YR

 

[ringmaster]

Most don't think the offense is a problem. But the offense doesn't operate in a vacuum. I'm talking about him keeping the defense off the field and keeping the offense in the game after the defense fails. Plus, don't discount the fact this OL isn't always a bastion as far as pass blocking. Should have been more descriptive. Sry about that.

Yes at times the o-line did struggle with pass blocking but to see in a few games this season where Romo had up to 7,8, or 9 seconds as evident in the Philly game in which he was sacked and fumbled the ball was the result of very good coverage by the Eagles secondary on that play it is good to see and there is always room for improvement in pass blocking with this group and I'm encouraged in what I've seen so far.

 

[jobberone]

Yes at times the o-line did struggle with pass blocking but to see in a few games this season where Romo had up to 7,8, or 9 seconds as evident in the Philly game in which he was sacked and fumbled the ball was the result of very good coverage by the Eagles secondary on that play it is good to see and there is always room for improvement in pass blocking with this group and I'm encouraged in what I've seen so far.

TR has always held on to the ball too long. That's a given. He's also one of the best ever QBs to make a souffle from chicken crap. The pass blocking has come a long way from last year and even earlier this year. They still get confused with games and stunts as well as blitzes esp thru the same gaps.

I don't want to wish my life away but I'm eager to see what these guys look like in another year or three.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I don't want to wish my life away but I'm eager to see what these guys look like in another year or three.

You got that feeling also I see.

 

[zeroburrito]

gb doesn't need as many comebacks or last minute drives so the last 2 stats don't mean too much.

rodgers is def having a better year.

 

[etw926]

Less is more with Tony Romo.

Same is said about your postings.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Nope. They would have been better. He passes the ball much more efficiently in the 20-30 pass attempts and 30-35 pass attempt splits. And when he has thrown the ball 40+ times, almost on queue, the offense has been inefficient. Bob Sturm has also pointed this out many times.

Meanwhile it keeps the defense on the field for a long period of time. And defensive players are historically more than twice as likely to get injured than offensive players. So...keeping them on the field would cause more injuries.

Didn't we have a bunch of injuries on defense the past 3 seasons?

I thought so.

Put it this way, if the offensive line is so much better and since we can *prove* statistically that throwing the ball better than your opponent wins 80% of the time....we should, by your logic, throw much more than we are now with Romo. He's got more time to throw the ball, right? So he should be even better. And we should be able to blow out teams early in the game and just coast to victory in the 2nd half.



Sure he's changed.

He's not audibling as much. He's not audibling out of run plays (remember, Jason Hatcher yelled at him in practice for audibling out of a running play last season). We are just playing more to his strengths which is when he is throwing the ball less than 36 times a game. Occasionally, there's nothing you can do to not throw the ball a lot. But, if you are throwing the ball 36 times a game, you are still on schedule to be throwing the ball 60% of the time! It creates unbalanced playcalling and Romo has proven that he's not good enough to overcome an imbalance of more than 60%. Few QB's in the NFL can.

And by not throwing as much, your defense is off the field and much less likely to get injured.

Less is more with Tony Romo.





YR

When you talk about Romo and his throwing efficiency based on number of attempts you're looking at causation rather than correlation.

There is nothing magical that happens on the 40th pass attempt that makes Romo suck.

But to get to 40 attempts probably a lot of bad things are happening in the game and you're probably behind in the ballgame.

As for less audibles (first let's never reference hatcher again).... But Romo audibles because we could only run successful in favorable situations. Now we can impose our will. Romo understands that.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Aren't you making his point with the bold statement?

No

 

[Crown Royal]

Nope. They would have been better.

YR

I mean, I agree with the premise of everything you've said, but this is only true if there is still competent QB play. the OL between late 09-12 was really, really bad. I wanted to run it more, but not sure if would have been significantly more effective.

 

[percyhoward]

Nope, not confusing cause with effect at all.

Less is more with Romo.

Anyway, I'll show you again what I was responding to...

He's throwing the ball much less per game and the offense and his performance is far more effective

You're attributing the success of the offense to Romo's throwing less. That's backwards. If merely throwing less really led to offensive success, all of the league's bad offenses would simply throw less and start to improve.

This year, we've had so much success running the ball that we haven't needed to throw as much. The reason for the success in the running game is the recent influx of offensive line talent. The cause of the "far more effective offense" is the improved running game. One of the effects is that we throw it less. Or in your words, "less Romo."

If all the Cowboys had to do to improve offensively was for Romo to throw it less, then Dallas wasted three 1st-round picks on offensive linemen in 2011, 2013, and 2014.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

here's my reasoning for MVP...he's playing at the level he is.

Tiger woods cant even swing a golf club after the same injury and surgery tony had.

that is playing LIGHTS OUT imo. ridiculous...like almost superhuman when you think about it

 

[Hoov]

There are statistical splits for QB's and one thing you can see pretty clearly, there is usually a point at where the QB stops being productive when it comes to pass attempts in a game. And the offense becomes less efficient at this point. Somebody like Rodgers and Brady can throw it about 45 times and that is their cut-off point. Somebody like Roethlisberger can throw it about 32 times and that is their cut-off point. Romo's is at 36 attempts in a game. After that, his performance drops and the offense as a whole becomes stagnant.

I think there have been a lot of coaching issues, not just Jerry Jones. When Parcells had Romo, we sure didn't throw it more than 36 times in a game that often. And that running game wasn't very good either. It's just that Parcells was committed to running the ball and knew the dangers (in general, not just with Romo) of throwing the ball too much.

Part of the issues I see is that Romo was trying to emulate Brady's pocket mechanics by staying back in the pocket. The problem is that they are 2 vastly different QB's. Brady is a big guy with a classic overhand throwing style and a much bigger arm than ever given credit for. Romo is more mobile, shorter and smaller about average arm strength with a 3/4 motion. It's why Witten (or any TE) doesn't score many TD's inside the 5-yard line while Brady's TE's do. Brady can throw over the top of the linemen and Romo really can't (or not as efficiently). So, why have Romo try and use Brady's pocket mechanics?

Romo would have been better off emulating somebody like Brees who moves up and into the pocket and finds his passing lanes really well. I really believe if Payton was our coach instead of Wade and Garrett as O-C, Romo would have never tried to emulate Brady.

And then we went to heavy shotgun use and were throwing the ball 63% of the time and it made for a lot of work for little reward and hoping that everybody was consistently on the same page. Some QB's like Rodgers and Brady and Peyton can pull it off. Romo can't at the consistency they can. Doesn't make him a bad QB, it just makes him more human than those guys who are flat out incredible.

Roethlisberger is the same way and he's not nearly as good as Peyton or Rodgers, but he has more SB rings than they do.

Less is more with Tony Romo.





YR

I have a friend at work that always talks about a "pitch" count for Tony Romo. His oppinion is that you have to be mindful of his attempts the way abseball managers monitor their pitchers pitch count. Don't know for certain but is sounds like that is what you are suggesting as well.

As for your earlier comment about understanding situational football - i wll agree that there are times i just figuratively scartch my head (really i yell at the tv) when romo does certain things.

An example would be the sack he took during the eagles game on 3rd and 1 after holding the ball for 4-5 seconds... on 3rd and 1 ? The replay suggested he was looking deep downfiled to Dez who was double covered. The eagles had just scored very quickly and i was thinking keep the drive going, jeep our defense off the field and give time to adjust to what the eagles just did. Its 3rd and 1 at nearly midfield, make sure of the first down to keep the drive going. It even looked like he could have run for it. That play bothered me.

The sack-fumble on 3rd and 19 allowed the eagles to go ahead - cant hold the ball so long there.

But he did come back after that and play really great. And i noticed he was getting rid of the ball much quicker the rest of the game.

And there were times in the past - not so much this year - when he would force the ball in the first quarter when we were tied or ahead and throw a pick. Its not necessary to force things in that situation - in the 4th quarter, yes. But not in the first quarter, and even on early downs he just wouldnt throw the ball away and try next down and a lot of times bad things happen. I know he can and does make amazing plays doing that sometimes, but in the fisrt quarter of a tie game or a game with a lead its not the time for those heroics.


There are a lot of things Tony does really well. The holding the ball a long time and the situatinal awareness just happen to be pet peeves of mine.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

gb doesn't need as many comebacks or last minute drives so the last 2 stats don't mean too much.

rodgers is def having a better year.

They are having a virtually identical year, which is pretty much what the chart is saying. Well one guy got to pile up 15 touchdowns against the hapless Vikings and Bears, there is that....