Clarifying My Stance on Tony Romo

[Banned_n_austin]

Ahh Ben. You were the one who posted this article earlier.

If the info in this write-up is indeed accurate, I find myself asking why some think Romo has a weak arm? Is it because of a few throws in warm-ups and some "touch" passes the other night in Tempe? I'll admit I wasn't necessarily mesmerized by the speed of the few throws made by Romo during the game, but I would hardly compare his arm strength to that of Jason Garrett's as some have attempted to do.

Wouldn't Parcells have jettisoned Romo instead of signing him to a multi-year deal if he indeed had a noodle arm? Just asking.

Exactly. A few guys with an agenda to begin with in the first place, go to a game and come back and tell us the end-all-tell-all, based on warm ups and a very conservative series of play calls ...

It's fine to come back and say you had a great time ... but to come back and spout this garbage based on WARM UPS AND CONSERVATIVE PLAY CALLS is insulting ...

Hos even tried to tell me Romo's pass to Crayton in the endzone had a 0% chance of being caught ... how in the world are people who have seen that pass supposed to take him seriously ... especially when Romo's arm strength is documented ... and film DOES NOT lie ... that was catchable ....

 

[blindzebra]

I've been out of pocket for a few days BZ...but I'm seriously wondering why this article is being dismissed by some.

It's not being dismissed, it is being posted again and again by the agenda patrol, who want to take an honest first hand observation and turn it into a flame war.

Everyone at the game said good things about Romo, and all of us would be happy if he turns out good. Too bad the other side is actively hoping Henson fails.

 

[Nors]

Carefull Ben - those that tend to toss around agenda can't take it when facts are thrown back in their face.

 

[Waffle]

Exactly. A few guys with an agenda to begin with in the first place, go to a game and come back and tell us the end-all-tell-all, based on warm ups and a very conservative series of play calls ...

It's fine to come back and say you had a great time ... but to come back and spout this garbage based on WARM UPS AND CONSERVATIVE PLAY CALLS is insulting ...

Hos even tried to tell me Romo's pass to Crayton in the endzone had a 0% chance of being caught ... how in the world are people who have seen that pass supposed to take him seriously ... especially when Romo's arm strength is documented ... and film DOES NOT lie ... that was catchable ....

I thought it was pretty obvious (even on TV) that Romo simply threw that ball too late. Had he released it when Crayton was at the 5, it would have probably been a TD.

 

[junk]

Carefull Ben - those that tend to toss around agenda can't take it when facts are thrown back in their face.

:laugh2:

Thats the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Rack]

That ball in the endzone was catchable. That's not even debateable. If it weren't catchable then the DB wouldn't of been able to get a hand on it.

 

[Nors]

Tick, Tock

 

[JDSmith]

I thought it was pretty obvious (even on TV) that Romo simply threw that ball too late. Had he released it when Crayton was at the 5, it would have probably been a TD.

That's how it looked to me too. He was a bit late with the throw. I don't think arm strength had anything to do with it. The ball had nice arch and got into the endzone, it was just that Crayton had run an extra step by the time it arrived. If it's thrown a half second earlier it looks like an easy catch to me.

 

[blindzebra]

:laugh2:

Thats the pot calling the kettle black.

Has he ever not ran away from the facts?

 

[Banned_n_austin]

Since I gave Hos all his opinions anyway I'll field this one.

What I saw in the game was route after route where he had one read to a big target running away from the defender.

The four throw where he needed something "extra" on the ball he was a tad behind on the short out, Witten had to comeback and did a great job in traffic, he was late and the ball fluttered on the deep one to Crayton, and the ball was nearly picked on the 20 yard skinny post.

What happens to the pass to Witten and the near pick when first team defenders are out there?

Henson almost threw a pick too ... but this is football ... almost doesn't count ...

 

[Rack]

Funny "some" posters here are accusing others of having an agenda towards Romo, when they have just as much of an agenda towards Henson.


Henson does have the more attractive "measurable" (i sure hope I worded that the right way) and is more of the prototype QB, but you can win superbowls with either a Henson type of Romo type, so I'm pulling for both of them. As far as I can remember, we had 2 good QBs every time we won a superbowl so why wouldn't we all praise BOTH of them when they do good and hope that BOTH of them turn into good, or maybe even great, QBs?

 

[Waffle]

It's not being dismissed, it is being posted again and again by the agenda patrol, who want to take an honest first hand observation and turn it into a flame war.

Everyone at the game said good things about Romo, and all of us would be happy if he turns out good. Too bad the other side is actively hoping Henson fails.

I actually thought Henson did pretty well himself. Both backups blew Bledsoe off the map, IMO. My stance on Bledsoe hasn't altered since we signed him and he showed me nothing Saturday to change my mind about him.

I know it's still early, but I would love to see how Bledsoe does when BP really has him playing QB.

 

[Nors]

I'm still waiting to see what is spin about this breakdown on QBs, and where I say Henson is the second coming of Aikman and Romo is a hack.


Hos, Adbutcher and I had a blast, met up with fans from another board and they were a great bunch of guys.

Overall thoughts:

Bledsoe was awful, that ball patting was driving us crazy. His only good throw was on a pick play to Witten.

Romo out played Bledsoe, he made good reads and gets the ball away on time, but his arm is not even close to the Drews. He paired up with Witten and made a really nice touch pass over the defender.

Henson was solid, he played within himself made good reads and had several of those WOW throws. He had no protection at all, and his only poor throw was the high one to Zuriel that could have been a TD.

Typical though, I'd expect nothing less.

Hos, Adbutcher and I had a blast



Mo, Larry and Curly

:laugh2:

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Thanks Hos for giving us your observations.

Unbelievable the amount of discussion this "Jason Garrett" wannabe is generating. :laugh2:


For those drooling over Troy's comments about Romo, go back and replay the Thanksgiving game 3 years ago when Hutch started against the Skins. Troy was saying Hutch was our future. Troy was a HOF QB, but he isn't a talent evaluator.

 

[Nors]

Funny "some" posters here are accusing others of having an agenda towards Romo, when they have just as much of an agenda towards Henson.


Henson does have the more attractive "measurable" (i sure hope I worded that the right way) and is more of the prototype QB, but you can win superbowls with either a Henson type of Romo type, so I'm pulling for both of them. As far as I can remember, we had 2 good QBs every time we won a superbowl so why wouldn't we all praise BOTH of them when they do good and hope that BOTH of them turn into good, or maybe even great, QBs?

I hope both turn out to be very good. We can peddle one of them for a high draft pick in time.......

 

[Waffle]

Troy was a HOF QB, but he isn't a talent evaluator.

But I guess WE all are??

 

[blindzebra]

Funny "some" posters here are accusing others of having an agenda towards Romo, when they have just as much of an agenda towards Henson.


Henson does have the more attractive "measurable" (i sure hope I worded that the right way) and is more of the prototype QB, but you can win superbowls with either a Henson type of Romo type, so I'm pulling for both of them. As far as I can remember, we had 2 good QBs every time we won a superbowl so why wouldn't we all praise BOTH of them when they do good and hope that BOTH of them turn into good, or maybe even great, QBs?

I agree in part, but those that are being called out for an agenda are not hoping Romo fails. We gave an honest observation of what we saw. We all said good things about Romo in our recaps, we have not torn him apart, fabricated his past, made insulting sig pics at his expense, or made post after post tick, tocking.

 

[Banned_n_austin]

It's not being dismissed, it is being posted again and again by the agenda patrol, who want to take an honest first hand observation and turn it into a flame war.

Everyone at the game said good things about Romo, and all of us would be happy if he turns out good. Too bad the other side is actively hoping Henson fails.

You didn't read my Here's to you, Drew Henson. letter ...

I gave Drew his credit where it was due ... and I didn't plan on saying anything negative about him ...

Your first hand observation has not changed despite Romo playing better ... and making his reads quicker and being more efficient ...

It's the thinking you can accurately assess someone's arm strenght, FROM THE STANDS, WITH NO RADAR GUN ... and not knowing the play ... etc etc ... that kind of thing - that has generated the reaction ...

Those kind of things tend to be insulting to those of us that know better ... sure, the sheep may bah and take your word for it ... but those of us that payed attention watching the game and happen to know facts about some of these players ability, call BS on SOME of your observations .... that's all ... nothing personal ... you're still my fellow Cowboy fans that I have respect for ... I just don't buy into your assesment ...

Nothing wrong with that, is there?

None of this is personal ... you are all still good people ... even you BZ ...

 

[Cbz40]

But I guess WE all are??

as for me .....You better believe iit.....

 

[Waffle]

as for me .....You better believe iit.....

At least you've actually seen EVERY Cowboy QB to ever play, CBZ.