If Romo had done a Montana-style drive...

[cowboyfan4life2]

I think people are going WAY OVER THE TOP here regarding this discussion. And much of it is coming from one side who feels "haters" are never happy. I think people need to start reading a little more of what is on the board instead of crying so much. If Romo is clutch or wins a SB or whatever...people that are Cowboy fans will be happy. It's not going to take JUST a SB. I think what most are saying is..."yeah the guy has got mad skills and puts up numbers, he just needs to learn to stop the 10 cent brain mistakes that have plagued him in most seasons." If that happens and we win, what is there not to like? You really think people would be unhappy? That's just foolish talk. Also, Dirk was clutch already. They had made playoff runs for a decade. 2006 was more on refs and 2007 was the only year people got upset. But it wasn't like the guy couldn't win. So there is no comparison. The point is...some think its in Romo's DNA to throw a few games away every year and not get to the promised land. Some think he can overcome. The goal, even for the former, is for him to make them eat crow. Everyone wins.

I don't think anyone is rooting against him, everyone in here wants the same thing. I would do just about anything to see another sb win, and I think most in here would as well. I just think we are all tired of seeing the same result year in and year out, and don't have a lot of faith in the guy changing his ways in his thirties.

 

[DFWJC]

..... Also, Dirk was clutch already. They had made playoff runs for a decade. 2006 was more on refs and 2007 was the only year people got upset. But it wasn't like the guy couldn't win. So there is no comparison. .....

Nobody in this thread said Dirk was not clutch, so you are making that up.

But you have to know that Dirk went many years with what seemed like thousands of NBA fans and analysts saying Dallas would never win the Title with him as ther best player. Even the year they won it, I had close freinds saying he was a huge choker--whcih was a joke.
And I can't begin to count how many said he was not clutch. Of course they were wrong, but the man did have an incredible number of naysayers.

My only point--which I stated clearly--was that I wanted him to win a title badly, and I now also want Romo (and team) to win one just as badly.
That's it.

 

[ufcrules1]

I don't think anyone is rooting against him, everyone in here wants the same thing. I would do just about anything to see another sb win, and I think most in here would as well. I just think we are all tired of seeing the same result year in and year out, and don't have a lot of faith in the guy changing his ways in his thirties.

Great post by you and Houston. I'm Romo's biggest critic here and I want nothing more for him to succeed. I would be in heaven with a superbowl.. but heck, I would setting for a few playoff wins. The only problem is I have literally given up on the guy years ago and he keeps proving my right with his boneheaded play. It's the same thing year in and year out and we still have the tired excuses for him.

 

[BIGDen]

that play was in the 3rd quarter. :bang2:

Wow. Do you even watch the games? This comment explains so much of your nonsense. You simply don't have a clue.

 

[Idgit]

...The point is...some think its in Romo's DNA to throw a few games away every year and not get to the promised land. Some think he can overcome. The goal, even for the former, is for him to make them eat crow. Everyone wins.

The real issue is that some believe there really is nothing to overcome. And they get irked that others really don't see that.

When you actually look at Romo's splits at the ends of halves or in games decided by a touch or less, or when you look at his TD:INT ratios in years where he's not playing with a broken finger, then their argument is pretty compelling.

 

[btcutter]

I don't know if you guys saw on the NFL Network a special called "One". It was all about #1 picks in the draft, one of which was Troy Aikman. They interviewed Aikman along with other players like Drew Bledsoe, Tim Couch, etc. giving advice to Andrew Luck. They talked with JaMarcus Russell, Tim Couch, and David Carr about their frustrations over not living up to expectations. Then they talked to QBs like Aikman and Eli Manning who have had the success. Aikman said a very telling thing. He said in his first year when he want 0 and 11 as a starter he kept asking himself, "What have you got to do to win in this league?" However, he was in the right system for him and was given the supporting cast he needed to be successful. He said he thought that some of the other guys who didn't make it likely would have if given what he was given.

Aikman is way too modest.
He got pummeled to a pulp in his first year. Not many rise up from that. You have to have tremendous confidence, toughness and skills to succeed after that type of a beating. He would have been a winner almost anywhere. We were lucky to have him.

Romo is not in Aikmans' class during their prime. Not close. Sure statistically he maybe better. But not mental makeup. Romo is a very good QB but he needs more support from the team. When he tried to carry the team it's feast of famine.

 

[Miller]

The real issue is that some believe there really is nothing to overcome. And they get irked that others really don't see that.

When you actually look at Romo's splits at the ends of halves or in games decided by a touch or less, or when you look at his TD:INT ratios in years where he's not playing with a broken finger, then their argument is pretty compelling.

There are numbers and there are game situations. You can look at all the splits you want but they don't erase games like Washington last year and others people have witnessed. I personally think some of its overblown but I don't think the knock on him doesn't have merit. I think it's foolish to think he had nothing to overcome.

I don't think anyone is rooting against him, everyone in here wants the same thing. I would do just about anything to see another sb win, and I think most in here would as well. I just think we are all tired of seeing the same result year in and year out, and don't have a lot of faith in the guy changing his ways in his thirties.

I like Romo and at the same time agree with this point. My point is that the truth is somewhere in the middle of people's extreme reality here where people get off on failure vs not enjoying a massive drought.

 

[Ring Leader]

I know we all want to forget the last game of the season, but I am wondering about one thing. What if Romo has the chance to win the game in a final drive like before, but instead he delivers a superb drive much like the greats -- Montana, Staubach, Elway, etc. -- and we score, win the game, and go to the playoffs.

However, the team is horribly banged up as you'll recall, and we get spanked by Seattle in the playoffs. Does Romo still get the credit for a great drive? Is he finally called "clutch" or does the playoff loss negate that? I think it's obvious that Seattle is simply a better team that we had little chance to beat, especially being so banged up.

I suspect if we had gone to the playoffs under those circumstances, we would still be screaming "Only one playoff win in 17 years." And Romo would not be called clutch because of that. The truth is he has had some clutch games. The game against San Francisco in which he played with broken ribs comes to mind.

And Montana threw for 3 picks in the "catch" game as well. It was the SF defense that sealed the deal with the fingertip tackle of Pearson after the catch (Of course Danny White fumbled soon after to officially seal it).

The point is that many of the great "Montana/Elway/Staubach" types had defenses that could close. Does Romo whiff on some finishes? Absolutely, but not nearly as many as purported. He just rarely gets a defensive stand following many otherwise game winning drives.

 

[Idgit]

There are numbers and there are game situations. You can look at all the splits you want but they don't erase games like Washington last year and others people have witnessed. I personally think some of its overblown but I don't think the knock on him doesn't have merit. I think it's foolish to think he had nothing to overcome.

WAS in week 17 last year was one game where the numbers made it pretty clear that he blew the game. Like it or not, the numbers usually do paint a fairly accurate picture of the QBs play on the field. And in Tony's case, both the numbers and his play have been good for a long time.

 

[Miller]

WAS in week 17 last year was one game where the numbers made it pretty clear that he blew the game. Like it or not, the numbers usually do paint a fairly accurate picture of the QBs play on the field. And in Tony's case, both the numbers and his play have been good for a long time.

Yeah and I've been one of the people preaching that. I also think he loses us games though through just flat out dumb play. I'm not saying all critical games. But ones like Detroit 2 years back and some others where we are up 21 and ints let a team come back. To me those are just as important because that could be the playoffs..any of those games. I;m not talking one bad game where the team stunk. I'm talking games where we are giving away games. Sorry but I think its foolish to look basically at the numbers and think Romo has trouble with the mental mistakes still and needs to get over that hump....despite me being a fan. Objectivity.

 

[DFWJC]

If all games count the same then we need to stop pointing out 1-2bad games a year because all QBs have those. No exceptions.

 

[FiveRings]

Yeah and I've been one of the people preaching that. I also think he loses us games though through just flat out dumb play. I'm not saying all critical games. But ones like Detroit 2 years back and some others where we are up 21 and ints let a team come back. To me those are just as important because that could be the playoffs..any of those games. I;m not talking one bad game where the team stunk. I'm talking games where we are giving away games. Sorry but I think its foolish to look basically at the numbers and think Romo has trouble with the mental mistakes still and needs to get over that hump....despite me being a fan. Objectivity.

The Detroit game wasn't all Romo. Romo wasn't a part of our geriatric secondary that Megatron ran circles around. Plus, as costly as interceptions are, you can't count on them being pick 6s...multiple times at that.

The way I see it, Romo should have 99% control of the offense, with the remaining 1% belonging to Red, which reserves him the right of yanking Romos leash back when he's having a bad risk/reward game.

 

[rayyyy5x]

so pretty much if romo doesnt play mistake free... then we lose
this is a problem and insulting to a 52 man team.... its also a insulting to those with football iq.. if one man has to carry the team to win and cant make mistakes then the TEAM is heavily flawed

and whoever said the defense kept us in it..... washing ran for 274 yards
this is absolutely was not one of the cases where our defense kept us in it

and as far as the mental mistake "brain farts" that romo apparently has, there is no way you study the game, complete nearly 70% of your passes, throw for almost 5000yds to have dumb moments like not knowing what 2+3 is. Not only is he putting up these numbers, but he's CONSTANTLY using his pocket presence to extend plays longer than i believe any qb can with our line. Pocket presence isnt an exact science, its all reactionary and tony has to do this more than others, its always something that can go wrong. Avoiding blitzers and keeping footwork is something tony does incredibly but no matter how good he is at this, its impossible for this to hold up long in every pressure situation ... these reads happen in split seconds and requires players to be on the same page, they cant be perfect every time. Tony is blamed because he does more than he should and does it consistently for people to forget that we even have a weakness...

 

[Reverend Conehead]

And Montana threw for 3 picks in the "catch" game as well. It was the SF defense that sealed the deal with the fingertip tackle of Pearson after the catch (Of course Danny White fumbled soon after to officially seal it).

The point is that many of the great "Montana/Elway/Staubach" types had defenses that could close. Does Romo whiff on some finishes? Absolutely, but not nearly as many as purported. He just rarely gets a defensive stand following many otherwise game winning drives.

Correction: Danny White did not fumble. He was hit while throwing an incomplete pass which was incorrectly ruled a fumble. The ref's mistake sealed the game. It drives me nuts that that awful call is never included in lists of controversial calls. With today's rules, that call would have been overturned by replay.

 

[burmafrd]

Great post by you and Houston. I'm Romo's biggest critic here and I want nothing more for him to succeed. I would be in heaven with a superbowl.. but heck, I would setting for a few playoff wins. The only problem is I have literally given up on the guy years ago and he keeps proving my right with his boneheaded play. It's the same thing year in and year out and we still have the tired excuses for him.

where is the emoticon for rolling ones eyes?

 

[btcutter]

Correction: Danny White did not fumble. He was hit while throwing an incomplete pass which was incorrectly ruled a fumble. The ref's mistake sealed the game. It drives me nuts that that awful call is never included in lists of controversial calls. With today's rules, that call would have been overturned by replay.

Like the Masters, we should have called it and have that call reversed! LOL!

 

[DFWJC]

The Detroit game wasn't all Romo. Romo wasn't a part of our geriatric secondary that Megatron ran circles around. Plus, as costly as interceptions are, you can't count on them being pick 6s...multiple times at that.

The way I see it, Romo should have 99% control of the offense, with the remaining 1% belonging to Red, which reserves him the right of yanking Romos leash back when he's having a bad risk/reward game.

Just the fact that someone goes and looks for a game early in the 2011 season --a season where Romo had 31 TDs and 10 ints--shows how the bad moments count 10x more than the good for some.

They forget that all the other QBs in the league also have a few games like that as well each year...some (see Eli and others) much more often than Romo.

Also, it's worth pointing out that Dallas got that big lead off of 3 TDs passes from a QB playing with broken ribs. But somehow his failures in that non-division game are still being brought up in May 2013 as if they're an every day occurance.

BTW, he was also playing with badly bruised ribs in the second half of the Washington last year. If people haven't noticed, the guy takes a serious beating.

I have news for some out there; Romo, like very other QB in the league, will have a bad game or two this year too. But if he and the WRs are playing most of the season like they did the second half of last year, we should be thrilled.

 

[Idgit]

Yeah and I've been one of the people preaching that. I also think he loses us games though through just flat out dumb play. I'm not saying all critical games. But ones like Detroit 2 years back and some others where we are up 21 and ints let a team come back. To me those are just as important because that could be the playoffs..any of those games. I;m not talking one bad game where the team stunk. I'm talking games where we are giving away games. Sorry but I think its foolish to look basically at the numbers and think Romo has trouble with the mental mistakes still and needs to get over that hump....despite me being a fan. Objectivity.

I love Tony Romo, and think he massively underappreciated by the average Dallas Cowboys fan.

But he does lose the occasional game for us, and the WAS game at the end of the season last year was, in my opinion, a perfect example. Yes, we could have still won it had other things broken right, but we came into that stadium ready to take it to them, coughed up the ball in the red zone early, and then he proceeded to have a three turnover day in a must win game. And they weren't the sorts of turnovers we frequently see that were the result of a blown protection or blown route adjustment. They were just bad throws. That's almost always going to get you beat.

That said, the exact same thing happens to every QB. Every one. So Tony's not alone in that regard. Overall, though, he's a clutch player who almost always gets his team into position to win the game when it matters. His splits are better than other guys' splits at the ends of halves because he generally plays better than they do at the ends of halves. His stats go up in games decided by 7 points or less because he's better in those situations than most guys. So, I'm saying the 'watch the game' mantra doesn't hold water because it's obvious when you watch the games that Tony's a very good player. And there is no stats argument against him, because the stats reinforce that.

That's the reality of the situation, so there's no use hiding from it when he actually does have a bad game and it lets the team down. He's a human being. That's going to happen. The solution for that is to make sure you've got a defense and a running game you can rely on to break the string when taking risks in the passing game is hurting you badly. We've been unable to have good QB, DEF, and running game play at the same time, for the most part, the last three seasons. That leads to a bad TO ratio, and a handful of key losses to good teams over the long run, and that's what's kept us our of contention.