News: Can Tony Romo Ever Get The Respect His Play Demands?

[Idgit]

IDK what people like to see in Tony Romo. He is a good QB and i am happy we have one. But he is not great nor is he a top 5 QB.

That said, IMO he gets all the respect his play demands.

For sure his stats last season were really good and the best of his career. But does that make him a great QB ? I think no.

There is a saying that every NFL QB can pick a defense apart when he has enough time. And time was what Romo had last year.

A great QB needs 3-4 secs to go thru 2-3 reads and delivers a completion. Romo cant do that. He always needed more time. Approxim. 2 secs more. That does not make him a bad QB but it's not something that sets him apart from mediocrity. He cant throw the deep ball with good enough precission that the defense really feels threatened. Last but not least he has troubles with the pre snap reads. Especially with setting up protections against the blitz and diagnosing opposing player roles. You can see there are reasons why he went as a FA and that he has limits talent wise.

Still he is a good QB. He is precise in the shorter routes. He is very coachable. He seems to have the trust of his offensive (and defensive!) players. They gather around him so there is some leader ability that he has. I put a ! behind defensive players because i think that is not always a given. Also Romo gives people the feeling he gives everything for the team and the success of the team and is a warrior on the field. I dont see him that way (in fact i think he is more of the opposite) but because people belive in him that makes him a good choice for us.

Romo made plays with his so called Houdini moves. They are great to watch for sure. But in fact he does not do it that often like it feels for the viewer when he remembers Romo play. We often tend to exaggerate when we remember good situations from the past. Romo needed (needs) more time in the pocket to play to his full strength. To let his talent shine thru. IMO the FO understood that - they conviced JJ (which was the to me harder part) and together made the right decessions. The invested in people who are able to give Romo the time he needs to succeed.

All in all i think Romo is a good QB but he is not near the top five. He is not in the same class like Rodger, Brees, Brady, Payton & Eli Manning, Rothlisberger or Luck. Does he belong in the top ten ? IDK. But he gets payed like a top 5 QB so the latter question is not really relevant to me.

We gave Romo a very high contract that his play and his age did not justify until then. We were under preasure because we made mistakes in the years before. The contract still was a mistake in my eyes but we mitigated it by investing in the right people after that. So it has his upside to have Romo playing for us for that much money. Still it is a measuring stick for Romo and he has to live with tougher critics because of it.

Really, personally, i am thru with Romo as a player. Too many times he disappointed me in the way he prepared for the season or/and for games. But the FO IMO has understood the weaknesses of him and build a team around him to succeed. Dont misunderstand me he is no bus driver, he has alot to to do with our success but they stripped some responsibility from him in which he was really bad and it showes (in a positiv manner).

To me Romos success is more the work and feel for his talents of the FO then his own work. I am really happy with our setup right now. Garrett and McClay seem to know the right direction and Stephen and Jerry seem to listen to them. I hope these people will be Cowboys for a long time.

This was a long, thoughtful post. But you've got enough gotchas in there that people are going to hit and then just say 'holy cow, there's no point.' Saying Romo is not in the class of Eli Manning, for example. There's just no point discussing that. That fact that you don't think he's a warrior on the field? It just screams that you're a fan who's unwilling to give the guy props in that regard for whatever reason. There's no convincing somebody who's going to overlook a guy playing with a punctured lung or a broken back.

He's also not in the top 5 for QB pay, last year, or this coming year.

For my part, I think he's one of the best QBs in the league, and has been for some time. I think, with better defensive play, he'd be rightly mentioned in that very top tier of players at his position. But that doesn't matter. He's good enough to win championships with. While our defense is not. That's all I care about right now.

 

[KJJ]

Foles' season was legit -- the catch is, it was just one season.

You're not "legit" if it's only one season. If he was legit Philly wouldn't have swapped him for an injury prone QB. There's a lot of QB's who've had one good season but weren't legit. It takes several good seasons from a QB to be legit.

 

[Idgit]

You're not "legit" if it's only one season. If he was legit Philly wouldn't have swapped him for an injury prone QB. There's a lot of QB's who've had one good season but weren't legit. It takes several good seasons from a QB to be legit.

Stats are just measurements. If you get an outlier, it doesn't mean the measurement is wrong or unreliable. It means your subject isn't necessarily consistent. And when you get a trend with your measurements, and they are consistently high marks, you know you've got a more consistent performer. It's not a huge leap to agree that consistently high measurements are preferable to inconsistent ones when you're talking about QB play.

 

[CyberB0b]

Can't say the same thing about Romo he's had much more talented teams than Luck. Romo didn't start his career with a 2-14 team and turn them into an 11-5 playoff team overnight. Twice in Lucks 3 year career he had to attempt over 600 passes. Luck has nothing around him which is why he had such a poor performance vs NE. If I could have one QB to start a team he would be the guy.

Yet, he has won nothing.

 

[DandyDon1722]

Of course you can judge my posting because of two personal point of views i wrote down instead of mentioning the main part. But you for sure have noticed that i did not put work into it to justify. The reason is that i think they are not that relevant in regards to the main topic. But i wanted them to be said (just because they are also my oppinion and to show that the way i feel about Romo has nothing to do with the way i judge his play)

My post has alot of arguments in regards to the main topic. It feels a bit strange to get an answer like that without even mentioning the rest of my post. But if you want to discuss my personal feelings about Romo feel free to do so.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Your entire post is contextual in it's entirety. There are ten people on the planet who can play quarterback at a high level. Romo is one. The fact that you dwell on the past is a weak argument. He could potentially win two Super Bowls yet you would be done with him because he has "let you down." There's no other way to extrapolate that statement than - it's personal. Romo has let YOU down. Did Quincy let you down, Chad, how about Ryan Leaf?

Let me ask a more direct question because this question seems to be the barometer for a lot of us in here and it's a simple one.

Did Romo let you down after scoring 45 on the Broncos and losing? A simple yes or no.

Here's another curious stance you take - you seem to give the organization the credit for finally giving him the help he needs but you fail to mention how the organization let Romo down for years.

You obviously think highly of Eli but if you think Eli would've sniffed a Super Bowl with Romo's defense the last five years, then there is no debating you. Did Eli carry a substandard team to the playoffs the last two years?

Finally, it's painfully clear you simply do now know enough about Romo to question his effort to get where he is, stay on the field and actually improve every year. The stories of wearing the coaches out after practice in his early years, of throwing in the hotel parking lot at 11 at night on road trips when he was a third stringer - the thousands of balls he still throws that nobody sees, the countless hours of tape and more recently the rehab he has to go through. Are you aware of any of this?

Finally, one last assignment. Give us one example of a Cowboy coach, somebody who sees Romo everyday who has ever questioned his preparation or work ethic.

 

[KJJ]

Stats are just measurements. If you get an outlier, it doesn't mean the measurement is wrong or unreliable. It means your subject isn't necessarily consistent. And when you get a trend with your measurements, and they are consistently high marks, you know you've got a more consistent performer. It's not a huge leap to agree that consistently high measurements are preferable to inconsistent ones when you're talking about QB play.

A stat is a measurement but like with all stats they can be misleading especially passer rating stats during this era. If passer ratings carried as much weight as Percy would lead everyone to believe Romo would be considered the second greatest QB in NFL history. He led the league in passer rating last season and only received 2 MVP votes. Nick Foles was sent packing despite the 3rd all-time highest passer rating ever the previous season. The measurements QB's are judged by are yards, TD's, playoff wins and SB's. All of those carry a lot more weight than passer ratings. Warren Moon is in the HOF despite an 80.9 career passer rating due to his career yards and TD's.

 

[KJJ]

Yet, he has won nothing.

He's only completed his 3rd season and already has 3 playoff wins and got the Colts to a title game this past season. He's a one man show in Indy put him in Seattle and they would win the SB every year. Romo wouldn't remain in one piece with the team Luck has in Indy. Go look at some of the hits Luck takes and come back and tell me Romo would survive that.

 

[Idgit]

A stat is a measurement but like with all stats they can be misleading especially passer rating stats during this era. If passer ratings carried as much weight as Percy would lead everyone to believe Romo would be considered the second greatest QB in NFL history. He led the league in passer rating last season and only received 2 MVP votes. Nick Foles was sent packing despite the 3rd all-time highest passer rating ever the previous season. The measurements QB's are judged by are yards, TD's, playoff wins and SB's. All of those carry a lot more weight than passer ratings. Warren Moon is in the HOF despite an 80.9 career passer rating due to his career yards and TD's.

That's just it: measurements aren't misleading at all. They're just measurements. Now, people can draw the wrong conclusions from measurements, or they can measure the wrong things, but the measurements themselves are only measurements.

And let's be clear, I think percy's 100% right in this debate. But to your point that the most accurate measurements for evaluating and comparing QBs would convince the public at large who the best players are, well that's obviously not the case. People simply can't separate individual play from team achievements very well (you're doing it yourself here, and you're far from a casual fan). Nor are they likely to overlook what's said during big games on telecasts, or to forget what they hear on those telecasts in championship games and in the Superbowl. They hear great things being said about the very good QBs on those teams, and they take it seriously.

And I'd argue that there are a lot of reasons why Warren Moon in sin the HoF, but there's very little doubt that most of the QBs in the Hall with him have the rating numbers to back them up.

 

[percyhoward]

You're not "legit" if it's only one season.

That's why I said...

The catch is, it was just one season. The real problem is that the sample is too small.

There's a lot of QB's who've had one good season but weren't legit. It takes several good seasons from a QB to be legit.

That's why I said...

Don't focus on the one-hit wonders, look at the players who are Top 10 year in and year out.

I'm not sure how you missed all of that, but now I think you can see that neither one of us bases our opinions on statistical outliers. With that out of the way...

Manning, Rodgers, and Romo have ranked in the top 10 every qualifying season.

 

[KJJ]

That's just it: measurements aren't misleading at all. They're just measurements. Now, people can draw the wrong conclusions from measurements, or they can measure the wrong things, but the measurements themselves are only measurements.

And let's be clear, I think percy's 100% right in this debate. But to your point that the most accurate measurements for evaluating and comparing QBs would convince the public at large who the best players are, well that's obviously not the case. People simply can't separate individual play from team achievements very well (you're doing it yourself here, and you're far from a casual fan). Nor are they likely to overlook what's said during big games on telecasts, or to forget what they hear on those telecasts in championship games and in the Superbowl. They hear great things being said about the very good QBs on those teams, and they take it seriously.

And I'd argue that there are a lot of reasons why Warren Moon in sin the HoF, but there's very little doubt that most of the QBs in the Hall with him have the rating numbers to back them up.

They're misleading as far as wins and losses. Romo had a 102.5 passer rating in 2011 but it only led to 8 wins for the Cowboys. QB's are judged on wins and how they perform in the playoffs. Some of you can agree with Percy all you want none of the stats and QB comparisons he comes up with will ever change the perception many have of Romo until he wins a ring...nuff said! As for Warren Moon he's in the HOF due to what he accomplished in the CFL and NFL. It's the Pro Football HOF not the NFL HOF but it's mostly his career numbers that have him currently ranked 7th on the all-time passing list that got him voted in. The top 8 all-time passing yardage leaders are all in the HOF.

 

[Rogah]

I know when passer ratings were created and I'm sure you were burning the midnight oil obsessed with them then. lol Passer ratings mean little in todays game because the rules have perfected the performance of QB's and it shows in their passer ratings. The rules allowed an average QB like Nick Foles to have the 3rd highest passer rating for a season in NFL history. Six of the highest passer rating seasons ever were from current QB's. Even average QB's have higher passer ratings than many HOF QB's. Mark Sanchez had a higher career passer rating with the Jets than Joe Namath. When you look at the all-time passer rating list 7 of the all-time leaders are current QB's. You want to waste time with them feel free.

Every QB stat is inflated these days compared to way back when.

12 of the 13 highest QB passing yardage seasons belong to current QB's.
8 of the highest 11 QB TD's thrown seasons belong to current QB's.

BTW, just about everybody has a higher passer rating than Joe Namath. He is the single most undeserving member of the Hall of Fame. The guy threw something like 50 more INT's than TD's. The only reason he is in is because of Super Bowl 3.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Did Romo let you down after scoring 45 on the Broncos and losing? A simple yes or no.

No. Not even close.

 

[Rogah]

The top 8 all-time passing yardage leaders are all in the HOF.

You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not, however, entitled to your own facts.

First of all, half of the top-8 all time passing leaders are not in the Hall of Fame because they are not yet eligible. So if we look only at eligible quarterbacks, the #5 guy on all time passing yards, Vinny Testaverde, is not in. Neither is #6, Drew Bledsoe.

 

[KJJ]

Every QB stat is inflated these days compared to way back when.

12 of the 13 highest QB passing yardage seasons belong to current QB's.
8 of the highest 11 QB TD's thrown seasons belong to current QB's.

BTW, just about everybody has a higher passer rating than Joe Namath. He is the single most undeserving member of the Hall of Fame. The guy threw something like 50 more INT's than TD's. The only reason he is in is because of Super Bowl 3.

I agree Joe Namath is in the Hall of Fame due to his guaranteed win in Super Bowl 3 which was one of the most important games in NFL history. That game made Namath legendary and without it he would've been just another QB. Every time he's interviewed they always ask him about that game and he never gets tired of talking about it, it made his career.

 

[5Stars]

He's only completed his 3rd season and already has 3 playoff wins and got the Colts to a title game this past season. He's a one man show in Indy put him in Seattle and they would win the SB every year. Romo wouldn't remain in one piece with the team Luck has in Indy. Go look at some of the hits Luck takes and come back and tell me Romo would survive that.

Go look at some of the hits that Romo has taken and tell us if Luck would have survived! You give so much credit to other QB's that it appears that you root for Romo to lose! smh

Actually, you have bad things to say about anything Cowboys related if some FANS want notice the good of the team! Nuff said!!

 

[KJJ]

You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not, however, entitled to your own facts.

First of all, half of the top-8 all time passing leaders are not in the Hall of Fame because they are not yet eligible. So if we look only at eligible quarterbacks, the #5 guy on all time passing yards, Vinny Testaverde, is not in. Neither is #6, Drew Bledsoe.

They'll all be first ballot Hall of Famers so I'm including them. Vinny and Bledsoe are 9th and 10th on the all-time passing list and neither will ever get in the HOF. Not enough playoff success and too many turnovers.

 

[percyhoward]

Warren Moon is in the HOF despite an 80.9 career passer rating due to his career yards and TD's.

Moon's primarily there because he ranked among the top 10 passers six times, which puts him among the Top 30 QB. His longevity and the yards and TD he compiled probably helped his case and gave him a tie-breaker over similar QB, but yards and TD by themselves don't get you into the HOF. The NFL created passer rating, in part, to keep guys like Bledsoe and Testaverde out of the HOF.

All-Time Ranks
Yards
7th Moon
9th Testaverde
10th Bledsoe

Passing TD
8th Moon
10th Testaverde
17th Bledsoe

All three Hall of Fame-worthy, right? Slow down....

Passer Rating
(avg rank in 7 best seasons)
Moon 6th
Testaverde 11th
Bledsoe 13th

These guys all played at least 14 seasons. Nobody cares what the player did in his 10th-best season, (Is anybody in the HOF for what he did in his 10th-best season?) so just focus on their legacy, which for most players is about their 5-8 best seasons. Moon is remembered for being a Top 6 QB, while the other two are remembered as being just above average.

 

[Idgit]

They're misleading as far as wins and losses. Romo had a 102.5 passer rating in 2011 but it only led to 8 wins for the Cowboys. QB's are judged on wins and how they perform in the playoffs. Some of you can agree with Percy all you want none of the stats and QB comparisons he comes up with will ever change the perception many have of Romo until he wins a ring...nuff said! As for Warren Moon he's in the HOF due to what he accomplished in the CFL and NFL. It's the Pro Football HOF not the NFL HOF but it's mostly his career numbers that have him currently ranked 7th on the all-time passing list that got him voted in. The top 8 all-time passing yardage leaders are all in the HOF.

They aren't a measurement of wins or losses. They're a measurement of the effectiveness of the QB play. There are factors that go into wins and losses that have nothing to do with how Tony Romo plays. A fact that percy has also demonstrated on a number of occasions.

I'm not arguing against public perception here. I agree with you that perception is sometimes a function of things that have nothing to do with the quality of play from the QB. I'm just saying that perception is just wrong. Just like people thinking Big Bang Theory is funny or that Nickelback was any good.

I don't really care all the much about the Warren Moon side discussion. I have no issues with him being in the HoF.

 

[DFWJC]

They aren't a measurement of wins or losses. They're a measurement of the effectiveness of the QB play. There are factors that go into wins and losses that have nothing to do with how Tony Romo plays. A fact that percy has also demonstrated on a number of occasions.

I'm not arguing against public perception here. I agree with you that perception is sometimes a function of things that have nothing to do with the quality of play from the QB. I'm just saying that perception is just wrong. Just like people thinking Big Bang Theory is funny or that Nickelback was any good.

I don't really care all the much about the Warren Moon side discussion. I have no issues with him being in the HoF.

You'd think he could wrap his brain around the team concept, but it's something that's always been hard for him...and several others around here...to grasp.

 

[Rogah]

Passer ratings mean little in todays game because the rules have perfected the performance of QB's and it shows in their passer ratings. The rules allowed an average QB like Nick Foles to have the 3rd highest passer rating for a season in NFL history.

In my description of passer rating, I specifically said you have to compare roughly equal numbers of passes. Foles only started 10 games that year, so that certainly didn't hurt, but does not make for fair comparisons with guys who started 16. And let me tell ya.... I don't think he is that great of a quarterback, but he had a phenomenal 10 game stretch that year. 27 TD's against 2 INT's is other-worldly. We will probably never see that many TD's for a QB in a single season with that few INT's again.