Finding Romo's Replacement

[Galian Beast]

I was making a logical response to your statement that the alternative to grooming a QB behind Romo is drafting one when he retires.

The other alternatives youve stated are to trade for a future franchised player ( of which I haven't seen any candidates, or hope for stroke of amazing luck like a Manning or Bree's situation

There is no logic in straw man arguments. You should work on that.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Whether through the draft, or via FA or UDFA, start the churning right now.....

If you believe in a guy in the first round and he is sitting there when your draft pick pops up, take him. If you think a guys has great potential as UDFA, sign him. Basically, start preparing now. Start the process now;

 

[sbark]

Whether through the draft, or via FA or UDFA, start the churning right now.....

If you believe in a guy in the first round and he is sitting there when your draft pick pops up, take him. If you think a guys has great potential as UDFA, sign him. Basically, start preparing now. Start the process now;

We used the practice squad last year as a holding pen for LB's and Safeties as we worked thru injuries, after that don't seem to develop off of it with exceptions being seldom. Practice squad can hold what?...8 guys---could just as well have 4 in study QB's on it at any one time searching for a diamond in the rough.........if the odds are low, increase the odds with sorting thru quanity.........Keep Vaughn as #2 and a development up top, and then load up the practice squad with Showers, Bridges and more.....keep the other 4 spots on the ps for apparently a couple of CB and interior DL (areas of need)

 

[StarBoyz83]

Is it just me or does it turn anybody elses stomach to think of watching the cowboys without romo!! I love romo!

 

[Galian Beast]

We used the practice squad last year as a holding pen for LB's and Safeties as we worked thru injuries, after that don't seem to develop off of it with exceptions being seldom. Practice squad can hold what?...8 guys---could just as well have 4 in study QB's on it at any one time searching for a diamond in the rough.........if the odds are low, increase the odds with sorting thru quanity.........Keep Vaughn as #2 and a development up top, and then load up the practice squad with Showers, Bridges and more.....keep the other 4 spots on the ps for apparently a couple of CB and interior DL (areas of need)

This is a good opportunity to address this issue.

The Practice Squad is not a farm system like other leagues have (NHL, MLB). The amount of reps these guys get is negligible. They are mainly scout team. It's an opportunity to buy time to be further evaluated in another training camp primarily. When a player gets hurt, they don't usually bump someone up from the PS, they sign a free agent.

 

[Fletch]

The hardest position to fill in sports is that of franchise QB. You take one when you can get one. To think it's going to happen on your schedule is foolish.

Until that position is settled, the future of this team is cloudy at best, IMO.

Exactly. Has nothing to do with economics. No time like the present.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

So why have so many of the teams with older franchise quarterbacks (Denver, New England, New Orleans) drafted quarterbacks in the 2-3rd round in recent years? Even Green Bay took a QB this year and Rogers isn't that old. I think that grooming a QB is still very relevant.

and how many of those have they kept?

i forget, but I bet right now its 0.

Matt Cassell....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope
Ryan Mallet....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope

or wait

I know

Green Bay is still grooming Matt Flynn to take over for aaron...thats the one I was missing. Oops, sorry, nope again.

 

[Alexander]

Packer formula? It worked ONCE. Romo was a true lottey win and no other way to put it.
Bottom line is that the only way that has any decent odds is to use a first round pick. And pray.

Once? How about the times they got good draft choices for Mark Brunell, Aaron Brooks and Matt Hasselbeck?

It is not about Aaron Rodgers. It is about valuing the QB position.

We have already seen what Jerry Jones has done at the position. Tripped over Aikman, got a miracle by his own drunken admission with Romo.

And?

 

[ThreeandOut]

and how many of those have they kept?

i forget, but I bet right now its 0.

Matt Cassell....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope
Ryan Mallet....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope

or wait

I know

Green Bay is still grooming Matt Flynn to take over for aaron...thats the one I was missing. Oops, sorry, nope again.

Last I checked it would be 3 for 3. The current backups (and heir apparents) with those teams were all drafted in recent years.

 

[Craig]

and how many of those have they kept?

i forget, but I bet right now its 0.

Matt Cassell....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope
Ryan Mallet....surely he's still being groomed to take over for tom? Nope

or wait

I know

Green Bay is still grooming Matt Flynn to take over for aaron...thats the one I was missing. Oops, sorry, nope again.

Pats didnt move on from those guys until they had the next guy at the beginning of a rookie contract. They want a next in line in the system that knows the playbook well before seeing the field.

There is a valid argument to be made against grooming a qb i guess, but you are nowhere near it.

 

[sbark]

This is a good opportunity to address this issue.

The Practice Squad is not a farm system like other leagues have (NHL, MLB). The amount of reps these guys get is negligible. They are mainly scout team. It's an opportunity to buy time to be further evaluated in another training camp primarily. When a player gets hurt, they don't usually bump someone up from the PS, they sign a free agent.

...How many trips up and down did a particular Dallas LB make last year, I thinking 5 to 7. by far the exception as I said, but they used it in that case.
****
As far as QB development, why not be innovative?

 

[burmafrd]

Once? How about the times they got good draft choices for Mark Brunell, Aaron Brooks and Matt Hasselbeck?

It is not about Aaron Rodgers. It is about valuing the QB position.

We have already seen what Jerry Jones has done at the position. Tripped over Aikman, got a miracle by his own drunken admission with Romo.

And?

who cares about picks. Its all about getting another franchize QB. And the packers got ONE for all their work.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Pats didnt move on from those guys until they had the next guy at the beginning of a rookie contract. They want a next in line in the system that knows the playbook well before seeing the field.

There is a valid argument to be made against grooming a qb i guess, but you are nowhere near it.

the point is...they arent drafting them to take over for tom...they're drafting them hoping to hit on one and make a butt load on a trade...like they did on cassell

 

[USMarineVet]

Romo's replacement needs to be addressed ASAP. I don't know what the QB situation is going to look like in next year's draft but if there's one that we covet I would do everything in my power to move up and grab him.

I would feel much better knowing that when Romo decides to retire, we have a QB that can step in having been in our system for a couple years under Romo's tutelage.

With the added compensatory picks we'll be receiving next year, we'll still be able to fill gaps even if we package a deal to move up.

QB is the most important position on the field and the sooner we get Romo's successor in here the better.

I feel Vaughn is more suited in a backup role than he is as our franchise QB.

 

[Alexander]

who cares about picks.

I do. So would any other rational individual.

You are working towards a goal that every team struggles with and you can eventually get something back for your troubles if your franchise QB is not worth replacing at the moment? That is a win win. You can never have enough draft choices.

How many times do you see a 5th, 6th or 7th round choice for a "special teamer" yield zero?

Use that for a QB, do a good job developing and showcasing, you can move that player as a marketable commodity if your starter has longevity.

I think you have no idea how awful the QB talent pool is. We are a few years away from Matt Flynn parlaying one game into a megadeal FA contract.

Get your backup showcased, gameplan for him to kill it in exhibitions, you have yourself a poker chip.

Its all about getting another franchize QB. And the packers got ONE for all their work.

And how many teams just get "franchize" QBs? ONE in 20 years is about average.[/quote]

 

[darthseinfeld]

There is no logic in straw man arguments. You should work on that.

You should work on your rebuttles without simply referring to someones argument as a straw man argument

 

[jnday]

A lot of people seem to be fixated on finding Romo's replacement. I understand the feeling after what happened with Troy Aikman, but I think the sentiment is mistaken.

First, I think the best chance we have to win is by giving Romo every resource we have in terms of draft picks. A franchise QB gives you the best chance to win a super bowl. A rookie quarterback on the bench doesn't help Romo.

Second let me address this issue. The salary cap. This isn't the 90's nor is it the early 2000's. The best aspect of having a rookie QB is to have them play for you for cheap so you can give that player a better team with the money you aren't spending on them. You used to be able to sign rookies for 6 years before you had to pay them. Now you can only get them for 4 years before you have to pay them. Note the 5th year option is basically the franchise tag, not quite as expensive, but none the less... It is 16 million dollars next year.

The next point takes me to the high level of nfl busts drafted in the first round. The bust rate is higher than 50%

Rather than draft a rookie quarterback EARLY and have them sit while Romo continues to improve as a player, I would rather sign a veteran qb in their 6th year even if they receive the franchise tag.

I'd rather give up two first round draft picks for a sure thing at QB and pay the player a veteran salary, than draft a quarterback in the first round HOPE he turns out good and sit him for 3-4 years and then pay him a veteran salary anyways....

The game has changed and your way of thinking needs to change with it.

Teams are destroyed by first round QB busts. And you would probably have us spend 2 to 3 first round draft picks on the position trying to find a proper legitimate successor to Romo.

It really worries me that part of your strategy for replacing Romo is just hoping that we find a great quarterback in the first round on our first try, despite the fact that teams across the league fail at this at a high percentage. Most drafts have 0 franchise quarterbacks, some have 1, and very very few have 2 or more, but magically we will get it done because?

It worries me more if they sign a get franchise QB. Teams do not let quality QBs hit the market under no circumstances. If they take your approach, there is a good chance that they will spend another twenty years before finding a top QB. I want a winning team after Romo. You are thinking short term. There may be bust in the first round, but Aikman, Manning , Luck etc, don't just show up on the open market or come late in the draft. Brady and even Romo are exceptions and true long shots that happened to work out. Poor planning and not investing in a top QB prospect will hurt this team for years. It seems like you feel that all resources needs to go toward helping Romo now with no consideration for the future. If I misunderstand your position, I apologize, but it sure seems like you are all about getting Romo a Super Bowl without thinking of life after he retires.

 

[xwalker]

Saints drafted a quarterback in the 3rd round, not the 1st.

Garoppolo was a 2nd round draft pick and is an UFA in 2018. The Patriots are more likely to trade him to another team like they did Mallett than have him replace Brady. Note they did the same with Mallett, but got very little value out of him.

The interesting thing with how the Patriots do it, IIRC is that they have that draft pick as the #2 QB, not the #3. Garoppolo was their only backup QB in 2014. That saves them a good bit of money as compared to paying a veteran #2 QB and carrying a 3rd developmental QB.

 

[dfan32]

You draft Romo's replacement after he retires.

Now you draft players to have a very deep talented roster to compete for championships now with Romo and when a rookie takes over he doesn't have to shoulder the load.

As others have pointed out, given Romo's age and injury history, we should be scouting college QB's now so that we have a complete picture of what's available so that if the opportunity arises, you can grab one. One reason I hope Jerry doesn't trade our 2016 first. Not saying that's when we should draft one but you have to keep that pick! Lol! Just in case!

 

[xwalker]

You should work on your rebuttles without simply referring to someones argument as a straw man argument

He does not really like discussions. He just likes to let everybody know his opinion (which he considers fact). He should probably start a blog and turn off comments which would allow him to give out his opinion without having to take the criticism.