I knew I opened up another can of worms when I posted this article.
Usually ex QBs and coaches speak much more highly of Romo than regular fans. Staubach, Aikman, Belichick, Holmgren,etc....they say he is not just good but great.
But not 100% of them (see Theisman)
At this stage, people have made up their minds one way or the other. We can all rehash the arguments and I doubt we'd ever convince anyone--or if so, maybe 1 in 50 or so.
I tend to think Romo would have at least 2-3 SB rings if he played on the teams Roger or Troy played on. That is
not saying he's as good and there is
no way to ever prove it.
In fact the proof leans against him because the fact is that the
team (who most would say were usually not great) did not ever make deep playoff runs with him, let alone win it all.
Other than Brady, its pretty clear that even if you do have a really good team, all has to fall in place to win it all.
The best team in the NFL in many years was the 2007 Patriots. By some freak miracle that team was held to 14 points and lost in the SB. The team that beat them was the team that upset Dallas.
The stars lined up for Brees once and he got one (and surely will not get another), Rodgers has just one...the same as Dilfer, Rob Johnson.
Team game folks.
But again, arguing this is just peeing in the wind. I'm not too bothered by those who disagree.
The only time I ever get a bit ticked is when it gets personal--like preposterous notions like he has no heart or isn't; tough or...when the data is false like hefolds in the 4th qtr mentioned in the article.
That's all
!
