Great observation about Romo

[gdogg24]

Spagnola has no credibility because he is a homer. He was advocating Troy Aikman in his final year with the team. He was doing then what he is doing now. He was critical of the fans who stated Aikman was past his prime and needed to be cut or traded in favor of a new QB. He blamed the offensive line and said Aikman was fine. A year later, Aikman was out of the league and no team was willing to sign him as their starter. Aikman then "chose" to retire.

Spagnola was wrong then as he is wrong now. There are many journalists who are critical of Tony Romo. They admire his athleticism but also state he is not at the level of the elite QB's in the league. Sure, do they blame Romo for all of the Cowboys problems? No! But are they like Spagnola and the homers on this forum who act like Romo is without fault and everything is to be blamed on the OL and lack of a running game, No!

I think Romo is a great athlete in general. I think he is very skilled and could play multiple sports well. However, he lacks many physical tools to play QB in the NFL well. He lacks height. He lacks arm strength. And he lacks the poise and intelligence to take what the defense gives him and forces bad plays. Sure, he makes plays out of nothing but in the playoffs, he has cost the team severely with his bad decision making. And decision making is half of what being a great QB is all about. If you are judging Romo as a fantasy QB, that's an entirely different topic.

I don't think even the most adamant Romo supporter would argue he's completely without fault but he's a proven quality QB regardless of whatever short comings any of his detractors want to throw out. He's talented enough as a QB to lead a number of teams to success. In the case of Romo neither extreme is correct in their assertions is he without fault? No. Is he completely lackluster, lacking the talent to win in this league and play at a high level? No.

 

[KJJ]

Like Spagnola said, those people who critisize Romo don't know what they're talking about. He does have an awful offensive line and has no running game.

The same can be said for Aaron Rodgers.

 

[Rockport]

The same can be said for Aaron Rodgers.

Green Bays offensive line was much better than the Cowboys the last 2 years. Not only that, but their defense was better than ours. You can add special teams to that also.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Green Bays offensive line was much better than the Cowboys the last 2 years. Not only that, but their defense was better than ours. You can add special teams to that also.

Yep... Rodgers takes a lot of sacks because he holds on to the ball forever, not because of the line (not saying they're great, either, but it's not all on them). Those sacks help keep Rodgers padded stats nice and high.

 

[KJJ]

Green Bays offensive line was much better than the Cowboys the last 2 years. Not only that, but their defense was better than ours. You can add special teams to that also.

That either shows how little you follow the league or how hard you look for excuses. LOLThe Packers OL helped get Rodgers sacked 51 times last season including 8 sacks in one half vs Seattle. Rodgers a mobile, athletic QB was sacked 15 more times than Romo in 2012. In 2011 the Packers defense finished dead last at #32 while the Cowboys defense finished 14th. Green Bay ranked 27th in rushing in 2011 compared to 18th for the Cowboys and the Packers still ended up going 15-1. Although the Cowboys ranked 31st in rushing last season the Packers weren't very good either ranking 20th. Their defense ranked 8 spots higher in 2012 than the Cowboys. When the Packers won the SB in 2010 their running game ranked 24th and Rodgers was sacked 31 times.

In 2 of the last 4 seasons Rodgers has taken 50 or more sacks and most of that has been due to having to throw all the time because of the lack of a running game and a poor OL. Over the past 4 years Rodgers has been sacked 168 times which is 16 more sacks than any other QB over that period. The Packers just lost their starting RB for the entire season and they lost Brian Bulaga for the year on the OL but they'll still end up making the playoffs. If you were reading posts on the board last season even FANS here were saying the Packers OL was worse than the Cowboys. According to you Romo has a horrible supporting cast even though practically every year they're listed as having one of the most talented teams in the league.

 

[KJJ]

Yep... Rodgers takes a lot of sacks because he holds on to the ball forever, not because of the line (not saying they're great, either, but it's not all on them). Those sacks help keep Rodgers padded stats nice and high.

Some of his sacks are due to him holding onto the ball but he doesn't try and force throws which is why he doesn't suffer a lot of int's. It's better to take a sack and live to see another down than turn the ball over.

 

[Rockport]

That either shows how little you follow the league or how hard you look for excuses. LOLThe Packers OL helped get Rodgers sacked 51 times last season including 8 sacks in one half vs Seattle. Rodgers a mobile, athletic QB was sacked 15 more times than Romo in 2012. In 2011 the Packers defense finished dead last at #32 while the Cowboys defense finished 14th. Green Bay ranked 27th in rushing in 2011 compared to 18th for the Cowboys and the Packers still ended up going 15-1. Although the Cowboys ranked 31st in rushing last season the Packers weren't very good either ranking 20th. Their defense ranked 8 spots higher in 2012 than the Cowboys. When the Packers won the SB in 2010 their running game ranked 24th and Rodgers was sacked 31 times.

In 2 of the last 4 seasons Rodgers has taken 50 or more sacks and most of that has been due to having to throw all the time because of the lack of a running game and a poor OL. Over the past 4 years Rodgers has been sacked 168 times which is 16 more sacks than any other QB over that period. The Packers just lost their starting RB for the entire season and they lost Brian Bulaga for the year on the OL but they'll still end up making the playoffs. If you were reading posts on the board last season even FANS here were saying the Packers OL was worse than the Cowboys. According to you Romo has a horrible supporting cast even though practically every year they're listed as having one of the most talented teams in the league.

That either shows how little you follow the league or how hard you look for excuses. LOLThe Packers OL helped get Rodgers sacked 51 times last season including 8 sacks in one half vs Seattle. Rodgers a mobile, athletic QB was sacked 15 more times than Romo in 2012. In 2011 the Packers defense finished dead last at #32 while the Cowboys defense finished 14th. Green Bay ranked 27th in rushing in 2011 compared to 18th for the Cowboys and the Packers still ended up going 15-1. Although the Cowboys ranked 31st in rushing last season the Packers weren't very good either ranking 20th. Their defense ranked 8 spots higher in 2012 than the Cowboys. When the Packers won the SB in 2010 their running game ranked 24th and Rodgers was sacked 31 times.

In 2 of the last 4 seasons Rodgers has taken 50 or more sacks and most of that has been due to having to throw all the time because of the lack of a running game and a poor OL. Over the past 4 years Rodgers has been sacked 168 times which is 16 more sacks than any other QB over that period. The Packers just lost their starting RB for the entire season and they lost Brian Bulaga for the year on the OL but they'll still end up making the playoffs. If you were reading posts on the board last season even FANS here were saying the Packers OL was worse than the Cowboys. According to you Romo has a horrible supporting cast even though practically every year they're listed as having one of the most talented teams in the league.

See post #22. It applies to you. In fact, you're hereby the ringleader.

 

[Rockport]

That either shows how little you follow the league or how hard you look for excuses. LOLThe Packers OL helped get Rodgers sacked 51 times last season including 8 sacks in one half vs Seattle. Rodgers a mobile, athletic QB was sacked 15 more times than Romo in 2012. In 2011 the Packers defense finished dead last at #32 while the Cowboys defense finished 14th. Green Bay ranked 27th in rushing in 2011 compared to 18th for the Cowboys and the Packers still ended up going 15-1. Although the Cowboys ranked 31st in rushing last season the Packers weren't very good either ranking 20th. Their defense ranked 8 spots higher in 2012 than the Cowboys. When the Packers won the SB in 2010 their running game ranked 24th and Rodgers was sacked 31 times.

In 2 of the last 4 seasons Rodgers has taken 50 or more sacks and most of that has been due to having to throw all the time because of the lack of a running game and a poor OL. Over the past 4 years Rodgers has been sacked 168 times which is 16 more sacks than any other QB over that period. The Packers just lost their starting RB for the entire season and they lost Brian Bulaga for the year on the OL but they'll still end up making the playoffs. If you were reading posts on the board last season even FANS here were saying the Packers OL was worse than the Cowboys. According to you Romo has a horrible supporting cast even though practically every year they're listed as having one of the most talented teams in the league.

Well, I don't know how you quantify "following the league" but your posts show without a shadow of doubt that you're football ignorant. Not an insult, just pointing out that you lack football knowledge. Instead of getting your takes from ESPN, maybe you should watch the Cowboy games and form your own opinion.

 

[DandyDon1722]

T

Spagnola has no credibility because he is a homer. He was advocating Troy Aikman in his final year with the team. He was doing then what he is doing now. He was critical of the fans who stated Aikman was past his prime and needed to be cut or traded in favor of a new QB. He blamed the offensive line and said Aikman was fine. A year later, Aikman was out of the league and no team was willing to sign him as their starter. Aikman then "chose" to retire.

Spagnola was wrong then as he is wrong now. There are many journalists who are critical of Tony Romo. They admire his athleticism but also state he is not at the level of the elite QB's in the league. Sure, do they blame Romo for all of the Cowboys problems? No! But are they like Spagnola and the homers on this forum who act like Romo is without fault and everything is to be blamed on the OL and lack of a running game, No!

I think Romo is a great athlete in general. I think he is very skilled and could play multiple sports well. However, he lacks many physical tools to play QB in the NFL well. He lacks height. He lacks arm strength. And he lacks the poise and intelligence to take what the defense gives him and forces bad plays. Sure, he makes plays out of nothing but in the playoffs, he has cost the team severely with his bad decision making. And decision making is half of what being a great QB is all about. If you are judging Romo as a fantasy QB, that's an entirely different topic.

Some of the stuff on here is hilarious. Still waiting for Romos list of good plays. In addition anybody who tries to say we would've even sniffed a playoff chance without him last year just can't be taken seriously.

As far as this post and i respect the opinion but II heard Greg Cossel on Colin Cowheard this week talk about Romo. The guy is as highly regarded as they come among scouts and personnel guys. He said Romo is top 5 in seeing the field and instinctually reacting (so much for height) and also said there isn't a throw he can't make (so much for arm strength). In fact he said its pver rated. Bert Jones and Dan Macquire had cannons and Joe Montana never had a gun like Farve.

Again it's a 90-10 pro Romo board for three obvious reasons. One is he gives us the best chance to win, two NOBODY comes to the table with a better option and three - the Romo book is not yet written.

Does he have to carry the team on his back in a playoff run - yes I believe he does on offense but the defense has to hold up their end of the bargain too (see Eli and the Giants and Flacco and the Ravens) and we have to get some breaks it's just the nature of the game.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Some of his sacks are due to him holding onto the ball but he doesn't try and force throws which is why he doesn't suffer a lot of int's. It's better to take a sack and live to see another down than turn the ball over.

But it's not better than throwing the ball away or dumping it for a few yards in the flat. And since I would guess 75% of sacks kill drives living to see another down doesn't get you much.

I would say Rodgers doesn't throw a lot of interceptions mostly because 1) he's good 2) he plays for a genius coach and 3) he has had consistently the best overall group of receivers (esp. from a depth standpoint) in the NFL since he became the starter. I remember after Rodgers first couple of seasons there was a fairly vocal minority of Packers fans that felt he didn't take enough risks and was always trying to be too perfect. I think he has overcome that now and trusts his arm to make a lot of great plays in riskier situations, but the holding on the ball for too long is sort of a leftover from that time.

 

[CyberB0b]

Romo isn't Rodgers. Is it that hard to grasp? He needs more help. Period.

 

[KJJ]

Well, I don't know how you quantify "following the league" but your posts show without a shadow of doubt that you're football ignorant. Not an insult, just pointing out that you lack football knowledge. Instead of getting your takes from ESPN, maybe you should watch the Cowboy games and form your own opinion.

I don't watch ESPN but you obviously do you keep mentioning them. The true definition of football ignorance is when a FAN on a post board acts like they know more than the people who played and coached the game. FANS like you come on this board all the time ripping ESPN, NFLN and everyone else who's job is to cover the NFL all because they give honest opinions about the Cowboys that FANS like you don't agree with. What are they suppose to do at ESPN glorify a team that keeps folding at the end of every season and crown Romo king for his 1-6 elimination game record? For the most part all the experts agree on the Cowboys they're a talented team that underachieves. They all agree that Romo is a very talented QB who has issues performing at the same level in elimination games that he does through most of the regular season. So the experts got it all wrong and only the FANS here know what's going on with the Cowboys and the rest of the league? No wonder so many SB predictions blowup in the faces of FANS on this board. Show me a Cowboy FAN and I'll show you someone who's wrong about the team 90% of the time.

You have a feeling the Cowboys are going to the SB this season what does that say about your football intellect? What have you seen the past 3 seasons that gives you the feeling the Cowboys are suddenly going to come out of 3 year funk in which the team hasn't had a winning season or a playoff appearance and magically reach the SB? What do you base your feeling on? Your feeling isn't based on what you've seen on the field it's all based on hope and wishful thinking because you're a FAN. So are you saying that most of Aaron Rodgers sacks are due to him holding onto the football too long? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth just asking for a clarification. If most of his 168 sacks the past 4 years were on him then he wouldn't be considered by most as the best QB in the NFL and the Packers would be looking to replace him.

Most of the sacks he takes are due to an OL that would get Romo and a lot of other QB's killed. Romo attempted 96 more passes than Rodgers last season but Rodgers got sacked 15 more times than Romo because he's playing behind a worse OL. Rodgers isn't nailed to the turf he has great mobility, a quick release and excellent pocket awareness but some of his sacks can't be avoided. Go back and look at the sacks he took in the first half vs Seattle last season it was one jailbreak after another he had no chance. Romo wouldn't have survived the first half behind that OL. Romo has never suffered a confirmed concussion with the Cowboys and Rodgers has suffered at least 2 concussions. The worst insight on this board is from those who can't stop being a FAN for a minute and just be honest. Most FANS here spend a lot of time tearing apart the games of Brady, Rodgers, Brees and Eli to try and make Romo look like the better QB.

 

[KJJ]

But it's not better than throwing the ball away or dumping it for a few yards in the flat. And since I would guess 75% of sacks kill drives living to see another down doesn't get you much.

I would say Rodgers doesn't throw a lot of interceptions mostly because 1) he's good 2) he plays for a genius coach and 3) he has had consistently the best overall group of receivers (esp. from a depth standpoint) in the NFL since he became the starter. I remember after Rodgers first couple of seasons there was a fairly vocal minority of Packers fans that felt he didn't take enough risks and was always trying to be too perfect. I think he has overcome that now and trusts his arm to make a lot of great plays in riskier situations, but the holding on the ball for too long is sort of a leftover from that time.

What's there to complain about with Aaron Rodgers he's arguably the best QB in the NFL? He tries to keep plays alive but regardless of the sacks he's taken he's been a spectacular QB who's put up some incredible numbers and wins a lot of games despite the lack of a running game or a solid OL. His coach is a genius? LOL Any coach who has Aaron Rodgers as their QB would look like a genius. Put another QB back there for 16 weeks and see how smart his coach looks. All QB's take a few sacks from holding onto the ball too long but most of Rodgers sacks are due to playing behind a poor OL.

 

[CATCH17]

Romo is good. Really good actually.


I'm just worried that its in his head that he's destined to lose in win or go home games and he just freaks out.

 

[85Cowboy85]

I wouldn't say his TD/INT ratio is partucularly impressive.

Donovan McNabb has a better ratio.. as do several of the elite QB's in the league. Tony's isn't bad either.. but not elite.

Tony Romo's Ratio: 1.94
Peyton Manning's: 2.08
Donovan Mcnabb: 2
Drew Brees:1.91
Phillip Rivers:2.03
Matt Ryan: 2.11

Just for fun:
Eli Manning: 1.46
Joe Flacco: 1.82
Kurt Warner: 1.62
Tom Brady: 2.71
Aaron Rodgers: 3.71

Most elite QB's have around a 2:1 career ratio. Brady and Rodgers are better but not sure why you would suggest his ratio is unimpressive.

 

[KJJ]

See post #22. It applies to you. In fact, you're hereby the ringleader.

Hard to take anyone serious who trashes the experts for giving honest opinions of the Cowboys and tags everyone here who's objective about the team as haters. All some of you want to do is focus on Romo's great regular season plays and ignore the few bad ones in the games that had the Cowboys season riding on them. Some of you put more importance on how Romo plays in the regular season than how he's performed in elimination games. As long as he continues to put up great regular season numbers it makes no difference to some how he performs when it's all on the line. That's certainly the impression you get here.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Tony Romo's Ratio: 1.94
Peyton Manning's: 2.08
Donovan Mcnabb: 2
Drew Brees:1.91
Phillip Rivers:2.03
Matt Ryan: 2.11
Tom Brady: 2.71
Aaron Rodgers: 3.71

Most elite QB's have around a 2:1 career ratio. Brady and Rodgers are better but not sure why you would suggest his ratio is unimpressive.

Im not sure why you have Tom and Aaron in the "just for fun" category, but i was going to say the same thing.

Elite QB's have a 2:1 TD/Int ratio or above.. evidenced by the guys on your list. Tony is almost clawing at the bottom of that list, but isn't near the top of the current elite QB's.

Im actually surpised that Phillip Rivers is above 2:1.

 

[85Cowboy85]

Im not sure why you have Tom and Aaron in the "just for fun" category, but i was going to say the same thing.

Elite QB's have a 2:1 TD/Int ratio or above.. evidenced by the guys on your list. Tony is almost clawing at the bottom of that list, but isn't near the top of the current elite QB's.

Im actually surpised that Phillip Rivers is above 2:1.

What I would point out is there is very little difference between say 2.0 and 1.9. It's like saying a 94 passer rating is not impressive but 95 is elite.

For instance lets say he throws 5 TDs 0 INTs against the Giants. A good game to be sure. But that one game would put his career TD:INT at 182:91. Voila he's at 2.0 for his career.

The reason I put them in the just for fun category was they are outliers. Not trying to discredit them or anything I think both those guys are better then Romo. But most guys who are currently considered elite have around the same ratio.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

What I would point out is there is very little difference between say 2.0 and 1.9. It's like saying a 94 passer rating is not impressive but 95 is elite.

For instance lets say he throws 5 TDs 0 INTs against the Giants. A good game to be sure. But that one game would put his career TD:INT at 182:91. Voila he's at 2.0 for his career.

The reason I put them in the just for fun category was they are outliers. Not trying to discredit them or anything I think both those guys are better then Romo. But most guys who are currently considered elite have around the same ratio.

I don't disagree.. he's right there on the doorstep.

 

[StarWiz2]

This is an age old argument that nobody is going to win until the last chapter is closed on Romo's career. You can make predictions, you can have opinions, you can spout stats out the wazoo, and you can read tea leaves; but IMO all we got right now is a mediocre QB who tosses more interceptions in critical moments than I've seen from many college level QB's, which ends up costing the Cowboys critical points in crucial situations leading to 8-8, or worse. You can blame the OL, blame the receivers, blame the defense, blame JJ's big ol' bus if you want, but I do apportion a lot of the blame onto Romo.

But again, that's an opinion. Just like it's my opinion that Romo is totally done as an effective QB, even if you put him behind Mount Rushmore. He did nothing in preseason to change that opinion. I question his arm strength and its accuracy, I question his heart, I question his ability to make better decisions, and I certainly question his ability to lead when he yells at everybody and points the blame in any direction other than himself, when he goes to the side-line and sits with his head so far down you wonder if it's a chronic biological problem, and when he stares emptily into the camera and comes up with, 'it's just a game.' Yes, that was years ago, and I harp on it, because that's when I first opined that Romo would never lead the Cowboys to a super bowl. Again, my opinion. Based on gut feeling. Meaning, there's still a great chance I'm wrong. But the years are passing, and Romo has yet to do diddly squat in what, IMO, are two of the most important stats of all: leading the Cowboys to consistent playoff appearances, and winning the Super Bowl.

But there is one sure thing I do know. I fervently hope Tony Romo proves me to be an idiot who shouldn't be allowed an opinion...ever again.