He would? Why?Romo would be a great play caller but I don't see him as a leader who would make a great coach.
Because he was great in the 2 minute offense calling his own plays and managing the clock. He sees the field well, and understands what defenses are trying to do, so I feel like he would be a good coordinator. Just my opinion.He would? Why?
Well..it was 15 years ago. Today? I'd agree the complexities/speed has changed and not possible or very rare.Pretty impossible.
In today's NFL, a QB is generally given a few plays to option to. I'd guess offhand that it's 2-5 or so. There are very very few QB's who call their own plays. PManning was prolly the last one. I don't think any QB today calls their own plays. It's just not done.
It was actually talked about quite a bit, how Romo would come to the line w/ the option of 2-5 plays. He was yelling KILL KILL KILL a lot which means he was changing the play at the line.Well..it was 15 years ago. Today? I'd agree the complexities/speed has changed and not possible or very rare.
I will see what I can find.
Well, not sure how seeing the field well relates to coaching, but OK!!!Because he was great in the 2 minute offense calling his own plays and managing the clock. He sees the field well, and understands what defenses are trying to do, so I feel like he would be a good coordinator. Just my opinion.
I think it would help a lot with in-game management and scheme changes...adapt to what they are doing or will do.Well, not sure how seeing the field well relates to coaching, but OK!!!
Walking on to an NFL team and become a really good NFL Qb...but of course LAZY...no motivation, would rather golf instead, team mates HATED him.It amuses me those thinking Romo is lazy. I wonder how a lazy guy could know so much about the NFL that he could actually get famous for knowing what play is coming next.
yeah a real sign of laziness there
I think the "idea" has morphed a little bit, giving it legs.Stunned this idea has made it this far
I don't think Dak is the guy who can lead us to a Ring; but I do not hate him. I defended him when that BS sexual harassment charge came out. I think he is a good guy. Just not good enough QB.Walking on to an NFL team and become a really good NFL Qb...but of course LAZY...no motivation, would rather golf instead, team mates HATED him.
Come on...brainless!
I agree. I am fully on record as saying dak deserves credit and criticism. To deny either is illogical sickness.I don't think Dak is the guy who can lead us to a Ring; but I do not hate him. I defended him when that BS sexual harassment charge came out. I think he is a good guy. Just not good enough QB.
But the continual attacks to this day on Romo tells you all you need to know about his haters. They are not real cowboys fans just like the Dak fanatics. They love or hate a player to the exclusion of all else.
The Dak haters are just as bad as the Dak bots.
If you think Belichick isn’t a leader amongst men because of his uninspiring demeanor, you must have thought the same thing about Tom Landry and his stoic appearance. No one was more emotionless than Landry. What’s laughable is wanting a former player who had a reputation as a choker as the Cowboys next head coach.So now we’re shifting goal posts, huh. No player can be a starting QB unless he’s a “leader of men” on the field. After all, that’s why the metonym for a QB is “field general”.
What’s laughable is someone thinking Dak — a far worse choker than Romo ever was — is a better QB than Romo.
Fail! Now, go sit in the back of the room.Why Call
- Few with a higher football IQ than Tony Romo--he is a coach at-heart and always has been, and even more so than Kellen Moore, oh by the way
- Highly relatable, which is why he's an analyst in the first place, which is going to translate to the job
- Parcells disciple, but really exposed to so much more given his analyst job for the past 8 years
- No one could possibly... not even Prime... come into the job with a greater flourish and public enthusiasm
- Probably the one guy who would be able to attract Jason Witten to come along side him as an OC
- No one could be more passionate about putting a Super Bowl ring on his finger (after having lost out as a player) than Tony Romo... maybe as passionate, no one more so.
Why Listen
- No one could be more passionate about putting a Super Bowl ring on his finger (after having lost out as a player) than Tony Romo... maybe as passionate, no one more so.
- He's made a lot of money. He doesn't need to be hung up on the money thing. He can afford it.
- Did I mention he's a coach at-heart? This is a very unique moment in his life, and a very unique opportunity to fulfill something really so much more special than being a TV analyst could ever be.
- Jerry should offer Tony a piece of equity in the Dallas Cowboys as a bonus to winning a Super Bowl... that would seal any deal, imo
First of all, you haven’t defined what a “leader among men” is. Second of all, the implication of anti-Romoites like you is that Romo isn’t one is because of a superficial “aww shucks”, unemotional, uninspiring, etc., attitude, all of which apply to both Belichick and Landry in spades. Third of all, there’s nothing laughable about wanting former players as head coaches, since numerous ones exist and have succeeded at it. What’s laughable is sticking with such an opinion just because he’s a player and not because of what qualifies him for it, one of which is not some over-used platitude that you’ve used, i.e, “leader of men”. Fourth of all, anyone who holds the opinion that Romo is a choker is a moron. Fifth of all, it’s laughable that a Dak/Stan would call the latter such when their boy is far worse at choking.If you think Belichick isn’t a leader amongst men and is uninspiring, you must have thought the same thing about Tom Landry and his stoic appearance. What’s laughable is wanting a former player who had a reputation as a choker as our next head coach.
The fact you need a definition shows you don’t have a clue what a leader is. A leader amongst mean is someone who’s respected, that players buy into and will fight for. No head coach will win a Super Bowl if their players don’t respect them. Coaches have different ways of leading. Tony Dungy was low key but his players respected him. A head coach doesn’t have to rant and rave on the sidelines to be a leader but you don’t get that.First of all, you haven’t defined what a “leader among men” is.
No, the fact that I need a definition is to know what you’re arguing.The fact you need a definition shows you don’t have a clue what a leader is. A leader amongst mean is someone who’s respected, that players buy into and will fight for. No head coach will win a Super Bowl if their players don’t respect them. Coaches have different ways of leading. Tony Dungy was low key but his players respected him. A head coach doesn’t have to rant and rave on the sidelines to be a leader but you don’t get that.