It's cliche to say QBs prospects in the draft are subpar; consider these

[GimmeTheBall!]

Yeah, Tony Romo will play until he's 37.
And he'll keep being a gunslinger and thowing picks (5 in some games) and in must-win situations.
And he'll keep telling us he needs to do better and he'll keep critiizing his receivers (even Witten) on the field when he makes errant thows.

To me Tony is the past.

Consider Ryan Nassib, Syrace, or Matt Barkley, USC.

We cannot remain static with Oh No Romo or with an almost average Orton.
We gotta upgrade before Tony descends into "average" with old age and injuries.

Let's look to the future. A QB needs maybe 2 years to develop. Just in time for Tony to step down. Plan for the future. If not now, when?

(I was remist for not mentioning our most glaring needs: O line and front defensive line. I'd rather take my chances at FA than miss out on a Barkley or a Nassib.)

 

[Galian Beast]

Yeah, Tony Romo will play until he's 37.
And he'll keep being a gunslinger and thowing picks (5 in some games) and in must-win situations.
And he'll keep telling us he needs to do better and he'll keep critiizing his receivers (even Witten) on the field when he makes errant thows.

To me Tony is the past.

Consider Ryan Nassib, Syrace, or Matt Barkley, USC.

We cannot remain static with Oh No Romo or with an almost average Orton.
We gotta upgrade before Tony descends into "average" with old age and injuries.

Let's look to the future. A QB needs maybe 2 years to develop. Just in time for Tony to step down. Plan for the future. If not now, when?

How many teams hit on quarterbacks in the draft? How many quarterbacks are complete busts? How many QBs have been drafted since 2006 with a higher career qb rating than Tony Romo?

You simply aren't paying attention to reality.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yeah, Tony Romo will play until he's 37.
And he'll keep being a gunslinger and thowing picks (5 in some games) and in must-win situations.
And he'll keep telling us he needs to do better and he'll keep critiizing his receivers (even Witten) on the field when he makes errant thows.

To me Tony is the past.

Consider Ryan Nassib, Syrace, or Matt Barkley, USC.

We cannot remain static with Oh No Romo or with an almost average Orton.
We gotta upgrade before Tony descends into "average" with old age and injuries.

Let's look to the future. A QB needs maybe 2 years to develop. Just in time for Tony to step down. Plan for the future. If not now, when?

I know at some point Dallas will have to. I really can't see Dallas taking a QB within the 1st 3 rds of this draft. I do agree it is something that should be addressed in advance but with Romo contract likely to be extended I think this year would be highly unlikely to get a QB

 

[rags747]

I like that and its very true. How many QB's picked since 2006 have the QB rating of Romo...I would venture to say ZERO. Also, no Barclay please, if we go QB I want someone who can run and throw and really challenge a defense.

 

[Lonestar94]

I like our chances with Romo rather than wondering off into the unknown.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Myself, I probably like Dysert as a QB prospect best. I just think he will be gone before we every have a chance at him. I like him better then Barkley or Nassib.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

How many teams hit on quarterbacks in the draft? How many quarterbacks are complete busts? How many QBs have been drafted since 2006 with a higher career qb rating than Tony Romo?

You simply aren't paying attention to reality.

Taking risks, to me at least, is preferable to the status qui. Believing that Tony is the answer is so 2007.
Belief me, we need to think about this MOST important position, before time and drafts pass us by and we'll be watching the NFL and CFL waiver wires.

I do thank you for your thoughtful response.

 

[dragon_mikal]

The Cowboys are going to focus on improving the areas that need improving.

Quarterback isn't one of those areas.

I don't care who the quarterback was because this team as constructed wasn't going to make the playoffs.

 

[Future]

The Cowboys are going to focus on improving the areas that need improving.

Quarterback isn't one of those areas.

I don't care who the quarterback was because this team as constructed wasn't going to make the playoffs.

Yep. This team doesn't win 5 games without Tony, and to think that we are just going to find a better replacement is borderline silly.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

The Cowboys are going to focus on improving the areas that need improving.

Yes, it makes sense to focus on other positions that we are in dire need of improving. But as of yet, i don't know of a magic formula that assures us of picking Wares in every draft. If it were so, we'd be stocked with great defensive players and great O linemen.

So I take it you are quite happy with Romo at the helm -- for the next 5 years while we face the RGIIIs and Kaeperniks and Russell Wilsons of the world.

On one hand Romo will dazzle with personal status. On the other hand he will kill us with bad thows at the worst possible times.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Yep. This team doesn't win 5 games without Tony, and to think that we are just going to find a better replacement is borderline silly.

I am addressing QB, not to replace tony next year, but to groom one for 2-3 years down the road. I apologize if I did not make that cleer.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Yep. This team doesn't win 5 games without Tony, and to think that we are just going to find a better replacement is borderline silly.

It's scary that some fans' minds are that numb. Just like Jerry thinks this is a 14-2 team held back by coaches, some fans think this is a 14-2 team held down by the QB. Did they not notice Frampton and Poppinga running around out there? This is not a good team.

 

[ShiningStar]

you are completely jumping on the bandwagon because "thinking" is to hard.

Sorry man you dont account for the injuries, you dont account for the offensive line, and you dont account for what Romo brings to the table.

i am tired of non journalistic reporters, vs opinionated people telling other people what to think.

qbs are hard, and this whole thing of still "trying to kill off the pocket passer" is so 2002 and so over.

you need a guy to get the ball forward so someone can catch it. high priced qbs running around is not going to last long. i dont care how cool the ferarri looks, if its parked in your garage the whole time its not doing anything for you.

do you know how easy it is to get a qb, seriously, its so freaking easy, ask the jets, ask Denver, because they had to spend oodles of money on a running qb, oh wait, ask the raiders, ask the jets before Wilson, and the Cardinals.

 

[ShiningStar]

Yes, it makes sense to focus on other positions that we are in dire need of improving. But as of yet, i don't know of a magic formula that assures us of picking Wares in every draft. If it were so, we'd be stocked with great defensive players and great O linemen.

So I take it you are quite happy with Romo at the helm -- for the next 5 years while we face the RGIIIs and Kaeperniks and Russell Wilsons of the world.

On one hand Romo will dazzle with personal status. On the other hand he will kill us with bad thows at the worst possible times.

thinking by just this, a second round qb beat a first round qb. there are lots of factor in deciding a good qb.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

As a former USC student who saw just about every game Matt Barkley played, I would recommend staying as far away from his as possible. I'm not a fan at all.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

you are completely jumping on the bandwagon because "thinking" is to hard.

Sorry man you dont account for the injuries, you dont account for the offensive line, and you dont account for what Romo brings to the table.

i am tired of non journalistic reporters, vs opinionated people telling other people what to think.

qbs are hard, and this whole thing of still "trying to kill off the pocket passer" is so 2002 and so over.

you need a guy to get the ball forward so someone can catch it. high priced qbs running around is not going to last long. i dont care how cool the ferarri looks, if its parked in your garage the whole time its not doing anything for you.

do you know how easy it is to get a qb, seriously, its so freaking easy, ask the jets, ask Denver, because they had to spend oodles of money on a running qb, oh wait, ask the raiders, ask the jets before Wilson, and the Cardinals.

You are right. It aint easy to git a QB.

But I submit that it is a lot harder to not take a chance in the draft and just keep seeing those INTs happen and keep whistling past the gravey yard, wishing that the football gods will just drop a quality QB in your lap.

 

[Future]

I am addressing QB, not to replace tony next year, but to groom one for 2-3 years down the road. I apologize if I did not make that cleer.

No no, I do understand that, and I think it's a good idea.

The issue I have is that this team has a QB good enough to win a Super Bowl right now. I know investing in the future is always a good idea, but using a top draft pick on a guy who is just going to be a back up for a couple years does not help you do that.

While I'd love to have a guy to groom, I don't want one at the expense of, let's say, Barrett Jones. If Dallas is not going to do everything possible to support Romo and build a better team around him, then you might as well blast that whole veteran core (Romo, Austin, Witten, Ware, SPencer, Rat) and go a different direction.

 

[ShiningStar]

You are right. It aint easy to git a QB.

But I submit that it is a lot harder to not take a chance in the draft and just keep seeing those INTs happen and keep whistling past the gravey yard, wishing that the football gods will just drop a quality QB in your lap.

they did and the cowboys blew it. Its not Romos fault the line sucked, its not his fault the d had injuries, its not his fault Jason doesnt play to his strenghts. you just had a gift from the football gods and look how many fans hated it.

teams can go back to drafting qbs every draft, but the way the talent has thinned out and been down played by colleges, its a wonder any team can keep fielding the teams the older fans remember. its not going to happen. the scrambling qb is not going to be the future no matter how many times you (not you personally) scream it.

money makes the biggest factor, some of these qbs cost to much to keep on the sidelines, and some are coming into the league but going to different coaches, different teams and different philosphies that also isnt easy for new qbs that some teams just want to throw out there to appease the fans.

the fans dont care, and i cant stress this enough, as long as the WR makes tds, no one cares what he does wiht his life. if the qb can make tds does anyone really care if some dogs died in palookaville? no.

wining matters and the fans will tell you that. even tho some just root for franchises that dont want to win but fill their coffers. fans want to win, sports are a business, its a hard mix.

 

[Galian Beast]

Taking risks, to me at least, is preferable to the status qui. Believing that Tony is the answer is so 2007.
Belief me, we need to think about this MOST important position, before time and drafts pass us by and we'll be watching the NFL and CFL waiver wires.

I do thank you for your thoughtful response.

Again tell me how many QBs have come out of the draft since 2006, with a higher quarterback rating than Tony Romo?

Now tell me how many quarterbacks have been drafted in the first round?

Divide the first number by the second number, and that is your rate of risk vs reward...

Tell me that you think you're on the right page.

 

[Galian Beast]

In case you don't want to answer the question

There have been 20 quarterbacks taken in the first round of the draft since Tony Romo became the starter of the Dallas Cowboys.

Of which only 1 has a career QB rating higher than Romo.

1/20 is 5%

FIVE PERCENT

You can expand it to other rounds as well, but your percentage is going to drop considerably.