it feels good to care this much again

coogrfan;1112518 said:
Not happening, at least not with Romo. Inexperienced qb's don't win in the NFL.

What about Tom Brady (coming in for D Bledsoe none the less), Big Ben, Leinhart, Bruce G, and P Rivers to name a few?!?! Please get off the Bledsoe wagon and move on!

To the original poster, I agree 1000%!!! I'm tired of having to defend Bledsoe's ridculous sacks/ints/poor decisions. At least with Romo we have someone that we don't need to build the Great Wall of China around and can use ALL of our weapons on a weekly basis. Is he going to make mistakes? Yes! Is he inexperienced? Yes! I'll take that any day of the week with our weapons on offensive because something about Romo hints at greatness.
 
iceberg;1112554 said:
he's got to be given the chance sooner or later - i'm glad the "cagey old vet" experiment is over. or i hope it is. : )

Yeah. I knew it was coming, and it needed to come exactly when it did. But given the results, I'm certainly not thrilled about the beginning. There were flashes of hope surrounded by giants of doom - but I definitely watched differently with him.

I was stoked to see the pat disappear from our gameplan. But that's about it so far.
 
Nice post Ice. I happen to be one who has implied you have been negative, If I haven't said it out-right... but I agree with parts of your post.

In the off season you said the O-Line would be horrible, and I didn't think it would be. At times you've looked right and at times I've looked right. Maybe I should've looked at it as, is the line good enough for Bledsoe. The answer to that is no... but would any line be? I do think it's good enough for Romo.

My bottom line is this: With Romo there is some hope. Indeed, there is some excitement, knowing he'll improve instead of what we are seeing being the absolute best we'll get. If he starts from here on out, he'll be much better by December than he is right now. That wouldn't happen with Drew.

With Bledsoe, what you saw was what you were going to get... and frankly, that wasn't good enough to ever get us much beyond round 1 of the playoffs... if that.

I know we'll see a lot of mistakes by Tony. I know. However, we'll see a team that likes it's QB, I think. A team that will rally around the signal caller and will play it's guts out for him. We'll see a team that uses all of it's weapons on offense and an o-line that doesn't have to hold it's blocks for 15 seconds in order to protect the QB. We'll see some first downs made when the blocking does break down. We'll see defenses that don't simply rush to a point 10 yards behind the center on every play because they know Bledsoe is planted there. We'll see excitement.

Last night's loss gives me more hope than the Eagle loss. Yes we had a chance to tie up the Eagles game in the last min. No we didn't have that chance last night. Still, watching Romo move the team down the field was exciting and you know next week, he'll be better. You knew that wasn't the case with Bledsoe.

I'd just about rather have an INT that see: sack, sack, punt. Either way... win or lose, it will be exciting with Tony... and we always know that next year will be much better than it would be with Bledsoe.
 
kingwhicker;1112558 said:
I was just saying you could go 7-9 with Bledsoe or 6-10 with Romo- I would rather build with the future and win 1 less game- Bledsoe's ceiling is about 8-8.

amen brother.
 
AsthmaField;1112566 said:
Nice post Ice. I happen to be one who has implied you have been negative, If I haven't said it out-right... but I agree with parts of your post.

In the off season you said the O-Line would be horrible, and I didn't think it would be. At times you've looked right and at times I've looked right. Maybe I should've looked at it as, is the line good enough for Bledsoe. The answer to that is no... but would any line be? I do think it's good enough for Romo.

My bottom line is this: With Romo there is some hope. Indeed, there is some excitement, knowing he'll improve instead of what we are seeing being the absolute best we'll get. If he starts from here on out, he'll be much better by December than he is right now. That wouldn't happen with Drew.

With Bledsoe, what you saw was what you were going to get... and frankly, that wasn't good enough to ever get us much beyond round 1 of the playoffs... if that.

I know we'll see a lot of mistakes by Tony. I know. However, we'll see a team that likes it's QB, I think. A team that will rally around the signal caller and will play it's guts out for him. We'll see a team that uses all of it's weapons on offense and an o-line that doesn't have to hold it's blocks for 15 seconds in order to protect the QB. We'll see some first downs made when the blocking does break down. We'll see defenses that don't simply rush to a point 10 yards behind the center on every play because they know Bledsoe is planted there. We'll see excitement.

Last night's loss gives me more hope than the Eagle loss. Yes we had a chance to tie up the Eagles game in the last min. No we didn't have that chance last night. Still, watching Romo move the team down the field was exciting and you know next week, he'll be better. You knew that wasn't the case with Bledsoe.

I'd just about rather have an INT that see: sack, sack, punt. Either way... win or lose, it will be exciting with Tony... and we always know that next year will be much better than it would be with Bledsoe.

oh i have been negative, i never denied that. i just felt i had strong reasons for why the path we were on wouldn't get us "there" - so i hated the path, but never the team. if we're finally done w/bledsoe and we're going to let romo have his chance, i'll focus on the line and watch it - see how it goes, and yea, you'll see me more positive because i'll feel better about our direction "honestly" - not lie about it cause i'm a fan.
 
Iceberg, just wanted to compliment you on a great post. I feel exactly the same way. I, however think that Parcells failure is almost complete. While I hope for Romo, if he fails, we will not be competitive to the Cowboys standard until at least 2012. The search for a Franchise QB should've started years ago. Parcells was content with old bus drivers and drafting linebackers. look where we are.... pathetic. But I agree, I felt good when Romo came in just for the mere fact a young guy was starting!
 
iceberg;1112535 said:
eli's looking good - he had to start.

phillip rivers, he had to play sooner or later.

leinart - oh the travesty.

alex smith is doing pretty good in SF i think.

all young qb's while we hold onto yesterday a little too tightly. we finally let go last night and we can try for the long term team again.

thank god.


All of those guys are 1st round picks, and all but Leinart were top 5 picks.

Tony Romo is an UFA who has been terrible for 3 years and been buried on the bench of a team that was trotting out Quincy Carter, Chad Hutchinson, Drew Henson, and Vinny T at starting QB over the years.

One of these things is not like the other~
 
theogt;1112528 said:
Yeah, Bruce Gradkowski isn't 2-1 as a starter.


Ben Roethlisburger didn't win his first 15 games.

You're a joke.

Completely different situation. In both of those cases, the qb's were asked to hand off, throw the occasional play-action pass, and in general avoid screwing up.

Do you really believe that the Cowboys have the running game and defense to go into Carolina next Sunday with that approach and have even the slightest chance of pulling off an upset?
 
iceberg;1112535 said:
eli's looking good - he had to start.

phillip rivers, he had to play sooner or later.

leinart - oh the travesty.

alex smith is doing pretty good in SF i think.

all young qb's while we hold onto yesterday a little too tightly. we finally let go last night and we can try for the long term team again.

thank god.

Romo is none of the above. He's nothing more than an NFL backup.

I wasn't happy about last night. I expected more of this team. Everyone was yelling Superbowl before the season started, and that's all I'll accept.
 
hardcorebob;1112560 said:
What about Tom Brady (coming in for D Bledsoe none the less), Big Ben, Leinhart, Bruce G, and P Rivers to name a few?!?! Please get off the Bledsoe wagon and move on!

To the original poster, I agree 1000%!!! I'm tired of having to defend Bledsoe's ridculous sacks/ints/poor decisions. At least with Romo we have someone that we don't need to build the Great Wall of China around and can use ALL of our weapons on a weekly basis. Is he going to make mistakes? Yes! Is he inexperienced? Yes! I'll take that any day of the week with our weapons on offensive because something about Romo hints at greatness.

I'm not on the "Bledsoe wagon", it's just that I consider him the lesser of two evils. Bledsoe makes some horrific mistakes, no question. But Romo will likely make even more, just because he's a newb playing for a so-so offense.

The difference here is that you guys are willing to risk flushing the season to find out if Romo can play. Imo it's too early for that.
 
Brady was a 6th rd pick. Montana lasted untill the end of the 3rd. Johnny Unitas was undrafted. So it can happen. Romo I think can be a good QB- not great, but good, and his mobility when having a line that is not good at pass blocking is a big plus.
 
"willing to risk flushing the season"??

snap out of it man, the season was flushed when the longshots they signed for OL didn't pan out. It was painfully obvious in the first half and that's why Bledoe got the hook.
 
burmafrd;1112617 said:
Brady was a 6th rd pick. Montana lasted untill the end of the 3rd. Johnny Unitas was undrafted. So it can happen. Romo I think can be a good QB- not great, but good, and his mobility when having a line that is not good at pass blocking is a big plus.

And THAT my friend is the KEY!!!
 
burmafrd;1112617 said:
Brady was a 6th rd pick. Montana lasted untill the end of the 3rd. Johnny Unitas was undrafted. So it can happen. Romo I think can be a good QB- not great, but good, and his mobility when having a line that is not good at pass blocking is a big plus.

What good is mobility if the qb consistently makes poor decisions and throws into coverage? What if Romo turns out to be more Mike McMahon than Brett Favre?
 
DIAF;1112588 said:
All of those guys are 1st round picks, and all but Leinart were top 5 picks.

Tony Romo is an UFA who has been terrible for 3 years and been buried on the bench of a team that was trotting out Quincy Carter, Chad Hutchinson, Drew Henson, and Vinny T at starting QB over the years.

One of these things is not like the other~

it doesn't matter. you can play or you can't. there is no "decoder ring" for the 10 easy steps it takes to be an NFL qb IF YOU WERE DRAFTED in any given position.

you can either play, or you can't. this has been my stance all along.

terrible for 3 years? ok, explain where you saw him being "terrible".
 
Blue&Silver;1112594 said:
Romo is none of the above. He's nothing more than an NFL backup.

I wasn't happy about last night. I expected more of this team. Everyone was yelling Superbowl before the season started, and that's all I'll accept.

i expected a LOT more from the parcells vaunted defense where every D pick was simply brilliant and destined to pan out because he's BP. we've got a *good* D but it's a long way from dominate.

bp's had 3+ years to do it his way and stat wise, we're not much better of a team and our biggest RALLY CRY is that our castaways can still get jobs in the NFL.

it's easy to see the D still needs work and not all of parcells picks are going to be all we hoped they would. that's fine - that's life.

let's end the parcells experiment this year and get jimmy back or even fisher and let's pick a direction and build towards it. THIS is all i've ever wanted. long term health and not spot checks of whatever.
 
burmafrd;1112617 said:
Brady was a 6th rd pick. Montana lasted untill the end of the 3rd. Johnny Unitas was undrafted. So it can happen. Romo I think can be a good QB- not great, but good, and his mobility when having a line that is not good at pass blocking is a big plus.

good points (is this you and i agreeing??? did hell freeze over twice in 2 days???) but i'm not out to say romo *will* be all that - only that he must have this year to find out.

been saying that for 2+ years now for ANY young qb we bring in.
 
coogrfan;1112667 said:
What good is mobility if the qb consistently makes poor decisions and throws into coverage? What if Romo turns out to be more Mike McMahon than Brett Favre?

and how will you find out if you never play him cause you've got this "lesser of 2 evils" running around?

we know bledsoe will screw it up. we've got 14 years of history to examine for that. we don't know what romo will do despite 3 years in the league. we've got parcells to thank for that.

but hopefully that's under the bridge now and we *can* find out what we've got in romo. THEN we'll know if we need OL or QB in the draft or what FA will need for us based on a new coach and a plan that doesn't involve serious nepitism and strange LB fetishes.
 
iceberg;1112401 said:
last night i felt something i'd not truly felt in years. something that i've loved about this team since we beat denver in the superbowl in the 70's. something that carried me through a 1-15 season while still wearing my jersey and supporting my team while in front of our family TV with a football in hand and my emotions on my sleeve. i cheered, i yelled, i wanted to win so badly i even cried at times when we didn't.

but i cared.

last night when romo hit the field, i cared again, almost like that all over again. i didn't care that the 1st pass was deflected and int'd. i didn't care romo threw it right at a lineman and was int'd again, and of course, it happened 3 times and each time bledsoe sat there looking like someone stole his dog, caring as much about the game as i did when he was playing, so i suppose that's only fair.

i've made it no secret that since bp refused to play henson or romo in the last 3 games and went with "best chance to win" in vinnie "not gonna be here next year" that i hated this "Hard Headed" time from BP and i viewed it as wasted because it would never work.

yep - i flat out said this path would *never* work. mostly the way bp was doing it. he knows bledsoe needed an all star OL and he wiffed in even trying to build one. but i digress - most people here know my stance and in several forums i've taken a lot of grief for being "negative" well i was so negative because of this "wasted time" i didn't want to waste. i wanted to play the young guys and i've always said sooner or later you've got to bite that bullet.

what would be so bad in doing so while you revamp your defense? where was the coordination of efforts (not outcome) to build up at the same rate? it just wasn't there, so i found it so very hard to "get into" a team i felt had zero chance to win. if i were to be wrong, if i'm still wrong, i'll admit it gladly but only because i will continue to say how i feel.

only i've suddenly got a reason to feel positive in a way i've not done in quite some time. this "elation" will only grow when parcells gives it up and goes off into the sunset. i thought he was going to at the press conference. he was about to cry, it seemed, and he said he was "ashamed" of this team and their performance.

screw you bill - you built this team. you coach it - you make every call on when people fart. if you're ashamed of this team then be ashamed of yourself for building it in this manner that many of us "fans" could tell was doomed from the start. when people ask about romo's mistakes, mr parcells, don't sit there and say "he shouldn't make those mistakes, he's been here four years..." yea - on the damn bench holding a clipboard.

you don't learn NFL speed on the sidelines. you don't learn the consequences of your split second decisions with a baseball hat on. and you don't grow as a player not playing. especially in those 4 years where YOU parcells squandered many opportunities to get these young guys time to learn and experience the NFL at full speed.

best chance to win. win what? meaningless games in which that experience could have helped romo tonight win a very meaningfull game? i said then each "game" isn't important and if you want a healthy franchise that's an investment and sometimes, in time for your players to learn to play at a higher level.

it's easy to see bp is about done and out. it's sad, really, cause i don't hate the man regardless of how it's come out over the last few years. i hate the stubborn decisions he's stuck with, the stupid decisions his players have made he's "Covered" for. last night was also the first time i ever heard parcells say that bledsoe was at fault for something and you could see how much it hurt him to say. he's known it all along but he's tried to excuse it away.

excuses are over. so is bledsoe. but the hope begins.

the hope that romo will learn from last night. the hope that the darts he was throwing at times were how he plays, NOT luck of a moment. herein lies a such a vast difference in the players and just why i now have hope - i don't know what romo is going to do.

i predicted drews INT at goalline to the play. lucky that time but overall accuracy is there on knowing drew will implode and only get worse as the games go on.

romo may not be the answer and i'm not going the route that he is. but we've FINALLY seen parcells realize bledsoe is NOT the answer and we DO know that. welcome to the club bill, now let's let romo have the rest of the year to learn and see what he can do.

only then will we know what we'll need to do in the next draft.

it's good to be home and it's good to be excited about this team again.
That's a very good post Ice.

I wish I felt as you did. I truly do. I feel worse after what I saw. I'm sitting here last night and today scratching my head and wondering how down by 5 at half and losing by 14 can be a positive sign. I just don't get it. I honestly don't.
 
I posted this on another thread the other day. Changing the present tense to the past tense for the Bledsoe era makes it relevant today:

I suspect Jerry Jones will soon realize that the excitement about Terrell Owens being a Cowboy is waning, that the original excitement and enthusiasm about having Parcells here has already dissipated, and that the off-and-on-the-road, bouncing-up-and-down, unreliable, accident-prone, bus driver “leadership” of Drew Bledsoe can not instill the esprit de corps that a talented but young team needs to overcome all obstacles. His Bledsoe-led team is bland, and if there is anything Jerry Jones wants to avoid for the Cowboys it is a blandness that drains the franchise of the intense, colorful, exciting ambiance that he promotes. He wants a team with a spirited fire that creates an emotional, flag-waving, money-generating loyalty among fans, one that makes the fans participants in the struggle of a team of brash young men attempting to overcome all odds separating them from the goal – and confident they can do it.

Drew Bledsoe is too much like Bill Parcells for a young team that is willing and able to charge if led with zest. An aged, too-plodding general at staff headquarters is no immediate problem, but, for a team faced with an enemy’s incoming fire, having a passed-over, hesitant, indecisive, middle-aged captain muttering (too late), “follow me!”does not inspire youthful exuberance or faith in leadership.

The team needs a competent, charismatic, young leader in the quarterback spot. Tony Romo may or may not be the leader to inspire such team elan, but such a spirited, we-can-do-it-no-matter-what leader is needed. It is time to find him.

Just my opinion.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
465,267
Messages
13,862,416
Members
23,788
Latest member
mattyice
Back
Top