Does Romo deserve the choker label

In my view, like Favre, Romo is not a choker. Like Favre, he is a gunslinger who makes as many stupid decisions about throwing as Favre does and like Favre, he will always throw a lot of interceptions because he thinks he can throw it right every time, but he can't do it either.

When I first saw Romo play I wasn't sure whether he was more like Staubach or Clint Longley. After watching him for a few years I have come to the conclusion that he is more like Longley and more like Favre than Staubach.

Romo is no Staubach as Staubach did not throw many senseless interceptions nor did he have Romo's apparant flippancy about losing - Staubach hated losing so bad he would do anything to avoid it but I don't think I can say the same about Romo, who gambles for his team but who, like Jerry, plays the long odds instead of the favorites and loses at least as many gambles as he wins.

Still, I like to watch Romo because you never know what he is going to do.
You always had a pretty good idea what Staubach was going to do.

Romo is going to have to grow up and learn to protect the ball if he is serious about winning because when he loses a gamble, the whole team loses. He is fun to watch but irresponsible. Unless he makes some adjustments to his personal style, the roller coaster ride will continue.

JMO
 
Heisenberg;4167817 said:
Choker? No. Occasional bonehead? Sure.
Click to expand...

This is kind of how I feel about it as well.


But he's got that choker deal because it's been seemingly all put on him in a handful of games where he's clearly not the person who kept them from winning. Unfortunately with the NFL (their media and fans) the QB takes way to much credit when teams win and they're pretty much given all the credit, or the vast majority of it, when the teams lose. It's the nature of the game, the position, and that's how it's always been and always will be.

I don't agree with it, and at times I just find it absolutely idiotic to view a team game in such a way, but it is what it is.
 
baj1dallas;4167835 said:
Choker? No. Top tier QB? No.
Click to expand...

I never really believed he was a top tier/elite QB. I do believe he had the potential to be. There are only maybe 2 or 3 in the league now in my opinion. Romo is a really, really good QB though.

Is he a choker? I say no. As someone said earlier, if it weren't for the bobbled Seattle snap, not many would call Romo a choker and I believe his career would be a lot different.
 
He had a relatively clean slate going into this season, I thought. 2009 was a good year for him and last year was kind of an asterisk. He has choked 2x this year and that reintroduces all of the negative history, fair, or not.
 
He is mentally soft. I think it all got started with the dropped Extra point. Like a kicker who loses it. A good psychiatrist would help him get over the hump.
 
Tony seems to get a lot of different labels placed on him. He is coming off a bad game and naturally many of his critics will jump on him. Goes with the job. For me I still see a guy who can help lead this team to a championship
 
Choking implies folding under pressure as a result of the pressure.

It's possible to have a bad game in close situations entirely by other factors (bad luck, bad day, minor injuries, idiot receivers, etc), and Romo has let us down in the clutch rarely enough that I see no reason to think it has anything to do with pressure.

Let me put it this way: Romo's record in close games is within a couple games of that of current "Supah clutch media golden boy" Aaron Rodgers, so...
 
If pro athletes werent making so much money nowadays there probably would have been a public outcry about that game on Sunday being fixed.
 
It's obvious many of our fans don't think about what it must be like for Tony. You have to be able to penetrate the object between yourself and someone else...break it down. It's called being sympathetic.

The bottom line is Tony is playing with broken ribs. If you can't get that not only is he hurt, he's likely on medication that effects him too, then I don't think you even belong in the discussion. So for the sake of the board, I don't discuss it much. :)
 
shockandroll;4167915 said:
You're pinning team losses on Romo, the entire team had as much to do with those losses as the QB. He played very well in 2010 before getting hurt, the coaches own defense killed him in 2010.

Your post is pretty far off, imo.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the point I am trying to make. Too many times Romo is blamed for the loss when in reality the inopportune mistakes were minor compared to the shortcomings of the rest of the team. How many of those losses did three defense allow three opposing team to March down field giving up big 3Rd down play after play. how many of those games did Romo give us the lead even after the inopportune turnover only to have the defense lose the lead.

Only 5 times in 64 games did Romo make a mistake that could not be overcome by three team, and two of those games happened this year.
 
yes, he hasn't done anything to disprove the label.

He is veteran enough that these stupid decisions with a lead or inside the 20 should be stopping.
 
notherbob;4167929 said:
In my view, like Favre, Romo is not a choker. Like Favre, he is a gunslinger who makes as many stupid decisions about throwing as Favre does and like Favre, he will always throw a lot of interceptions because he thinks he can throw it right every time, but he can't do it either.

When I first saw Romo play I wasn't sure whether he was more like Staubach or Clint Longley. After watching him for a few years I have come to the conclusion that he is more like Longley and more like Favre than Staubach.

Romo is no Staubach as Staubach did not throw many senseless interceptions nor did he have Romo's apparant flippancy about losing - Staubach hated losing so bad he would do anything to avoid it but I don't think I can say the same about Romo, who gambles for his team but who, like Jerry, plays the long odds instead of the favorites and loses at least as many gambles as he wins.

Still, I like to watch Romo because you never know what he is going to do.
You always had a pretty good idea what Staubach was going to do.

Romo is going to have to grow up and learn to protect the ball if he is serious about winning because when he loses a gamble, the whole team loses. He is fun to watch but irresponsible. Unless he makes some adjustments to his personal style, the roller coaster ride will continue.

JMO
Click to expand...
Alright, sure, when you look at his INT percentage compared with his contemporaries, it looks somewhat average at 3%, but come on, let's not get carried away pretending that some of the all-time greats were THAT much better.

Just for some perspective, you should know that Aikman's career INT% is also 3% as is Dan Marino's. And Staubach? His was 3.7% I know, different era, but still...

Other than that, I agree. Romo needs to dial down the risk taking a bit in certain situations and stay focused the entire game. But then most QBs could benefit from that suggestion whose names aren't Tom Brady.

BTW, Manning's number is 2.7%. So is Brees. Anyone know who has the lowest career INT%?

Rodgers. His is a ridiculous 1.9%.
 
Can someone provide a definition of "choker" and possibly include percentages which would substantiate and quantify what a choker would look like.

And then can someone give an example of a quarterback who is a choker and explain why he is?

Thanks.
 
notherbob;4167929 said:
In my view, like Favre, Romo is not a choker. Like Favre, he is a gunslinger who makes as many stupid decisions about throwing as Favre does and like Favre, he will always throw a lot of interceptions because he thinks he can throw it right every time, but he can't do it either.

When I first saw Romo play I wasn't sure whether he was more like Staubach or Clint Longley. After watching him for a few years I have come to the conclusion that he is more like Longley and more like Favre than Staubach.

Romo is no Staubach as Staubach did not throw many senseless interceptions nor did he have Romo's apparant flippancy about losing - Staubach hated losing so bad he would do anything to avoid it but I don't think I can say the same about Romo, who gambles for his team but who, like Jerry, plays the long odds instead of the favorites and loses at least as many gambles as he wins.

Still, I like to watch Romo because you never know what he is going to do.
You always had a pretty good idea what Staubach was going to do.

Romo is going to have to grow up and learn to protect the ball if he is serious about winning because when he loses a gamble, the whole team loses. He is fun to watch but irresponsible. Unless he makes some adjustments to his personal style, the roller coaster ride will continue.

JMO
Click to expand...

I don't think it's fair to compare Staubach's competitive fire with Romo's flippancy.

First, Staubach didn't play the bulk of his career in the ESPN/cable/satellite/social media ages like Romo has.

Second, Staubach isn't under the microscope like Romo is.

I think people make too much of Romo's comments about football being "just a game" or whatever he said.

If you think Romo doesn't want to win or doesn't take these games seriously, you're crazy.

But Romo, like all players under intense scrunity, have to shield themselves from the world as it defines you SOLELY by how you play on the field.

Those who don't have a safety net crumble under the pressure of being defined by ONE thing. So Romo, trying to provide balance to his worth, says that football isn't everything. He's trying to maintain his sanity and his sense of self worth under the crucible of intense public criticism.

Fans live surrogately through players/their teams but we can't experience the pressure players go through as it relates to win and losing. All we go is arm-chair complain and criticize. But no one has defined us as losers like they do Romo or others who fail while millions of people watch. No one is criticizing us on message boards, in newspapers, on television, on social network sites like they do current players.

So should Romo buy into this "football is my life" mentality under the above scenario?

No. He needs to find balance in his life too. That doesn't mean he loves football any less than Staubach. It simply means he's human, and he needs to put all the hateful things being said about him in perspective.
 
A choker is someone who gives away a games they could have won.

Rightnow he does deserve the label because everytime anyone watches Romo they'll be thinking choke.
 
SilverStarCowboy;4168144 said:
Rightnow he does deserve the label because everytime anyone watches Romo they'll be thinking choke.
Click to expand...
Anyone?
 
in the famous words of a legend:

"deserve's got nothin' to do with it"

when you sign up to be the QB of the cowboys, this comes with the territory

he will carry that label (wheether cowboy fans like it or not) unless he does one or more of:

significantly improve his december record
win multiple playoff games
win a SB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 34 more.
Total: 14,787 (members: 134, guests: 14,653)
Robots: 1,140

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,265
Messages
14,526,364
Members
24,208
Latest member
CowboysQC
Back
Top