NFL Network Top Ten Meltdowns - Romo number 9

[RedRaiderCowboysFan]

Holy smokes. You'd take JP Loseman over Romo and you're calling DallasEast pathetic?

I forgot about Losman probably he sucks. But ya I would take Manning, Rivers or Roethlisberger anyday over the current qbs on this team.

 

[Rampage]

I forgot about Losman probably he sucks. But ya I would take Manning, Rivers or Roethlisberger anyday over the current qbs on this team.

has anybody told you lately how much you suck?

 

[RedRaiderCowboysFan]

has anybody told you lately how much you suck?

Not nerely as much as anybody who displays a sign of "in romo we trust". If you will trust in that, your future can't have a positive outlook.

 

[DallasEast]

Ya I guess saying a qb in his 7th season who has a 0-2 record in the playoffs compared to 3 Super Bowl Wins, 4 championship games, and big time stats from each of those 3 first round qbs is such a silly statement. Silly me, why would I want any of those qbs on my team when I can have romo?

I bet that is what Jerry tells himself everyday, thats why under his watch this team fails every year and those teams win.

If you would rather have romo then any of those qbs taken in the first round of 2004, then you are pathetic.

More silliness.

Your opinion is that Romo's not a good quarterback. Same old same old. However, that wasn't what I clearly bolded in red and referred to. Again, your statement was this:

"This will be his 7th year and so far hasn't accomplished anything compared to say the Qb class of 2004."

I see that you attempted to later back track somewhat by adding, "...any of those qbs taken in the first round of 2004...". Good for you. Still, the following is the quarterback class of 2004:

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/04QBClass.png

Romo has CLEARLY outclassed and outplayed all fourteen quarterbacks drafted that year from the 22nd OVERALL pick down. That isn't even arguable.

So, that leaves us with the three remaining quarterbacks drafted in '04. Three. Three out of 17.

Okay.

If you believe that Eli Manning is head-and-shoulders above Tony Romo, that's your mental shortcoming, but let's keep this centered on the real reason behind your statement.

Manning helped quarterback the Giants to a Super Bowl victory, right?

Of course it is, but PLEASE explain in your own words why you disagree. Please.

Moving along.

Ben Roethlisberger helped do the same for the Steelers, right?

Ditto. Please post your rant about his overwhelming quarterback qualifications also.

Lastly...



Philip Rivers?

What has he done to twist your hormones up in an uproar? Please. Be specific.

Please explain how all three quarterbacks are more accurate throwing the football or how their turnovers PALED in comparison to Romo's or how 'astronomical' their quarterback ratings are to his.

This will be interesting, but it's very apparent what your true motivations on this subject are and have been for a long, LONG time. They are a matter of public record.

Now, about that seventh year part...

You (and very VERY few others) even have the tiniest inclination of comparing quarterbacks with such unequally comparable starting experience behind center.

Yet you would. Now, that's weak and that's truly pathetic. I do have one last request though.

Could you answer exactly how many Super Bowls Troy Aikman had won by his 39th game as a starting quarterback?

Thanks.

 

[Dodger12]

Who are you talking to? I never said that. Perhaps you are quoting me so that you can talk to someone else.

As for Green Bay, there are actually tons of intelligent Packers fans who realize that 6-10 may have had more to do with a rotten defense, not Rodgers.

You make excuses for one QB going 6 and 10 even though he's on your top 5 list while posting in a thread about Romo's meltdowns. Wasn't it you that refered to him as Mr. Non-December, or something to that effect? Isn't that what this thread that you're posting in is all about?

But the argument began over a "top-five qb" distinction. When making that distinction, future hopes do not count, only past performance.

But, of course, when discussing Aaron Rodgers and your faith in him as a top 5 QB, you throw the "future hopes do not count, only past performance" line out the window.

You are correct that Romo has a track record and Rodgers does not. Perhaps Rodgers will fall apart this year. However, it is more realistic to think that Rodgers would be even better in his second year as a starter.

Of course, it can't possibly be realistic that Romo might make the Pro Bowl again when healthy, especially since he's made it the 2 seasons when he was healthy. That kind of logic only works for you when discussing QB's not named Romo.

Please. Give this stuff a rest. You can hope the QB of your most hated rival fails but no matter how much you try, you can't ignore the guy's a Pro-Bowl QB who gives his team a chance to win each and every week. His stats in his relatively few starts are off the charts and he's led his team to the playoffs in 2 of the 3 seasons he's played and it would have been a third had he not been injured. You make a brash statement about what people think of Romo outside of Cowboy land and have no way to back it up while completely dismissing his stastical superiority to every QB not named Peyton Manning. He's far from perfect, but to believe that anyone would take Rodgers over Romo or that Rodgers is a better QB after a disasterous 6 and 10 season season is just plain ludacris.

 

[CowboyMike]

More silliness.

Your opinion is that Romo's not a good quarterback. Same old same old. However, that wasn't what I clearly bolded in red and referred to. Again, your statement was this:

"This will be his 7th year and so far hasn't accomplished anything compared to say the Qb class of 2004."

I see that you attempted to later back track somewhat by adding, "...any of those qbs taken in the first round of 2004...". Good for you. Still, the following is the quarterback class of 2004:

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/04QBClass.png

Romo has CLEARLY outclassed and outplayed all fourteen quarterbacks drafted that year from the 22nd OVERALL pick down. That isn't even arguable.

So, that leaves us with the three remaining quarterbacks drafted in '04. Three. Three out of 17.

Okay.

If you believe that Eli Manning is head-and-shoulders above Tony Romo, that's your mental shortcoming, but let's keep this centered on the real reason behind your statement.

Manning helped quarterback the Giants to a Super Bowl victory, right?

Of course it is, but PLEASE explain in your own words why you disagree. Please.

Moving along.

Ben Roethlisberger helped do the same for the Steelers, right?

Ditto. Please post your rant about his overwhelming quarterback qualifications also.

Lastly...



Philip Rivers?

What has he done to twist your hormones up in an uproar? Please. Be specific.

Please explain how all three quarterbacks are more accurate throwing the football or how their turnovers PALED in comparison to Romo's or how 'astronomical' their quarterback ratings are to his.

This will be interesting, but it's very apparent what your true motivations on this subject are and have been for a long, LONG time. They are a matter of public record.

Now, about that seventh year part...

You (and very VERY few others) even have the tiniest inclination of comparing quarterbacks with such unequally comparable starting experience behind center.

Yet you would. Now, that's weak and that's truly pathetic. I do have one last request though.

Could you answer exactly how many Super Bowls Troy Aikman had won by his 39th game as a starting quarterback?

Thanks.

 

[Rampage]

Not nerely as much as anybody who displays a sign of "in romo we trust". If you will trust in that, your future can't have a positive outlook.

yeah you just have an av mocking the qb of the team you're a "fan" of.

 

[Hostile]

Whats with the personal attacks? Im guessing you wont get any warnings because you aren't a TO defender or a Romo basher. You guys stay in you Silver and blue heaven thinking that Romo hasn't been a choker. The rest of the world will laugh

What personal attack? Report it, point it out, and shock me.

 

[Sammy Baugh]

You make excuses for one QB going 6 and 10 even though he's on your top 5 list while posting in a thread about Romo's meltdowns. Wasn't it you that refered to him as Mr. Non-December, or something to that effect? Isn't that what this thread that you're posting in is all about?

But, of course, when discussing Aaron Rodgers and your faith in him as a top 5 QB, you throw the "future hopes do not count, only past performance" line out the window.

Of course, it can't possibly be realistic that Romo might make the Pro Bowl again when healthy, especially since he's made it the 2 seasons when he was healthy. That kind of logic only works for you when discussing QB's not named Romo.

Please. Give this stuff a rest. You can hope the QB of your most hated rival fails but no matter how much you try, you can't ignore the guy's a Pro-Bowl QB who gives his team a chance to win each and every week. His stats in his relatively few starts are off the charts and he's led his team to the playoffs in 2 of the 3 seasons he's played and it would have been a third had he not been injured. You make a brash statement about what people think of Romo outside of Cowboy land and have no way to back it up while completely dismissing his stastical superiority to every QB not named Peyton Manning. He's far from perfect, but to believe that anyone would take Rodgers over Romo or that Rodgers is a better QB after a disasterous 6 and 10 season season is just plain ludacris.

Dude, you need to learn to read. Look back at the posts. A Cowboys fan said that other Cowboys fans who want to dump Romo are foolish and I agreed. I flat out said that Romo was a good quarterback. I did say that he struggles after December 1 but this is hardly news. I said nothing about his ability to make the Pro Bowl in the future, I simply indicated that he did not make the Pro Bowl last year. So I wasn't blaming Romo. I simply said that he was not a top 5 NFL quarterback. This claim is not as controversial as you make it out to be.

Ware is top 5. Witten is top 5. Newman is top 5 when healthy. So, see, I am more than willing to recognize positive performances by Cowboys players when warranted.

As far as Rodgers goes, if you read what I wrote you will see that I did not bank on his future. I even said that he might implode in the future. What I did was point out that last year (past performance), Rodgers' yards, TD's, interceptions, and QB rating numbers were all better than Romo's. Based on last year's numbers, there actually is a good case for rating Rodgers higher than Romo. Since you missed this, let's rehearse, according to stats from NFL.com:
Rodgers 4,038 yards / 28 TD / 13 int / 93.8 rating
Romo 3,448 yards / 26 TD / 14 int / 91.4 rating

I openly agreed that Romo's missing some games may have had an effect on some of these stats. But I also pointed out that qb rating is independent of games played, and that Rodgers threw fewer interceptions than Romo despite the fact that he played in more games.

As for my statement about what people outside of Cowboys land think, I did back up what I said with evidence. I cited NFL Network and Football Outsiders specifically, and to this I would add ESPN and commentators on Sporting News. The fact is, no one has produced any contrary evidence, other than the dubious Pro Bowl claim, while I have produced several resources. I've backed up everything that I have said.

 

[Dodger]

What was Aikman's record and qb rating after his first 39 games? And how did that work out for Troy? So if a qb's career is judged by their record and rating after just 39 games, with your logic then romo is a far more talented qb then Troy and that he should have been benched? I bet you were driving the Steve Walsh bandwagon weren't you, if you were even a "fan" before they started winning Super Bowls. Can you even begin to make an argument that romo is more talented to Troy with that kind of logic? No, because Aikman had it all, thats why he is a 3X Super Bowl champ and hall of famer.

He was comparing Romo to Ryan, not Romo to Aikman. How you turn that into him thinking that Aikman should have been benched is beyond me. And by the way, Aikman has three rings because he played on a better team than the current Cowboys team and one of the best teams of that era.

Too bad the NFL doesn't take into consideration how long a player has played based on the # of games but instead does it based on the # of years in the league.

Consideration for what?

 

[RedRaiderCowboysFan]

More silliness.

Your opinion is that Romo's not a good quarterback. Same old same old. However, that wasn't what I clearly bolded in red and referred to. Again, your statement was this:

"This will be his 7th year and so far hasn't accomplished anything compared to say the Qb class of 2004."

I see that you attempted to later back track somewhat by adding, "...any of those qbs taken in the first round of 2004...". Good for you. Still, the following is the quarterback class of 2004:

http://i356.***BLOCKED***/albums/oo4/DallasEast1701/04QBClass.png

Romo has CLEARLY outclassed and outplayed all fourteen quarterbacks drafted that year from the 22nd OVERALL pick down. That isn't even arguable.

So, that leaves us with the three remaining quarterbacks drafted in '04. Three. Three out of 17.

Okay.

If you believe that Eli Manning is head-and-shoulders above Tony Romo, that's your mental shortcoming, but let's keep this centered on the real reason behind your statement.

Manning helped quarterback the Giants to a Super Bowl victory, right?

Of course it is, but PLEASE explain in your own words why you disagree. Please.

Moving along.

Ben Roethlisberger helped do the same for the Steelers, right?

Ditto. Please post your rant about his overwhelming quarterback qualifications also.

Lastly...



Philip Rivers?

What has he done to twist your hormones up in an uproar? Please. Be specific.

Please explain how all three quarterbacks are more accurate throwing the football or how their turnovers PALED in comparison to Romo's or how 'astronomical' their quarterback ratings are to his.

This will be interesting, but it's very apparent what your true motivations on this subject are and have been for a long, LONG time. They are a matter of public record.

Now, about that seventh year part...

You (and very VERY few others) even have the tiniest inclination of comparing quarterbacks with such unequally comparable starting experience behind center.

Yet you would. Now, that's weak and that's truly pathetic. I do have one last request though.

Could you answer exactly how many Super Bowls Troy Aikman had won by his 39th game as a starting quarterback?

Thanks.

I won't argue that romo stats are better then everyone down from #22, even though Schaub has the chance to put up some really good #'s and has since he joined the Texans. Sorry this is so long but wanted to make sure all of your points were addressed. Would rather it be too long then short.

Starting with Manning, just because he is a Giant doesn't mean he is less of a qb then romo simply because he is a Cowboy. If romo had been in Manning's place and it was the Cowboys, you would be saying how great romo played and he was the main reason the team won. So you and many others are trying to justify Manning's performance that it wasn't really him but his entire team while trying to put romo's shortcomings on everyone else. I know its hard for you to imangine that the very best of the NFL doesn't always play in Dallas. Of course Eli didn't win the SuperBowl by himself, but he certainly was a huge part of why they did. But throwing for 6td's and 1 int while winning 3 straight playoff games on the road, not to mention the NFC championship in the coldest game at Lambeau field, and preventing the Patriots from going 19-0 is pretty impressive, for him and the team. But again if that was romo, you would be putting all or 99.9 % the praise upon him.

And Big Ben, considering he was ROY and won 15 straight games and went to the AFC championship as a rookie, then came back the next season to win a Super Bowl. Sure he might not have had the prettiest game but he did enough to win and didn't turn the ball over to become the youngest qb to ever win a SuperBowl. Then in 2007, he was 3rd in tds behind Brady and yes romo with 32 setting a new franchise record also but only had 11 ints and ranked 2nd in rating only behind Brady. And having the sieve for an offensive line he has had, its a wonder how he keeps playing, shows how tough he is. Do you really think romo could take that kind of beating behind that line. And if you want to call the game winning drive against Arizona in the Super Bowl as helping his team, look again. That was a qb putting the team on his back and carrying them down the field to win the game. You may think romo can put a drive like that together in a game, but so far he hasn't done it on the biggest stage in the NFL, just like Manning also did the year before. Has romo also had a game with a perfect rating like Ben did in 2007 against the Rams? Yes they have an awesome defense, but Ben has shown that he can put up big time stats and make plays in the clutch like in the Super Bowl. Until romo does that you can't even mention them in the same breath. Also playing in the cold weather affects the passing game and Ben's stats, unlike playing in the climate controlled Texas Stadium or the new stadium.

Now Phillip Rivers, this past season led the NFL in td passes with 34 breaking another club record, qb rating at 105.5. In 2006 also led the NFL in 4th quarter qb rating. romo has never lead the league in td passes or has never finished the season as the highest rated passer. I know romo has a high 4th quarter rating though. Rivers has also played in an AFC championship, with a torn ACL. Do you think romo would have played with that kind of injury? If he can't play with a hurt pinkie finger, then I really don't think romo would be man enough to play with that kind of injury. You have to respect a player whio plays with a torn ACL. Shows he has heart, also have never heard of any of these guys collapsing in the shower after a loss.

So the favorite argument is that romo only has 39 career starts and is 27-12. Ya, most qb's, esp those drafted so high dont have the luxury of sitting on the bench for 3 plus years and stepping into a team that is loaded with the talent that the team had when romo started playing. The high picks are drafted onto bad teams and won't put up big stats and many wins while they adjust to the NFL with out good or great players aorund them. So to say romo is better then qbs after 39 starts based just on stats and win/losses in the regular season is skewed since romo wasnt a rookie starting on a bad team. If you want to make an accurate comparison to romo after 39 starts, find qbs who sat on the bench for 3 or more seaons for their team and then started to play and see how they compare for 39 games. Or even find qbs who werent on the same team for 3 years before they started to play after having more then 3 years experience. Its common football knowledge that it is better for a rookie to sit and learn instead of just being thrust into the starting lineup. But because of the expecations placed on them and the money they are making, most qb's get thrown into the fire. romo got the benefit of having to sit, and now we see how he plays with all those expectations. Manning so far has lived up the #1 overall pick status, so has Big Ben playing for a team that also had 5 championships. Even now more rookies are playing from day 1 and are showing why they could play as rookies and were deserving of being high #1 picks. (Ryan, Flacco)

Another favorite is that romo has broken team records and that makes him better then most every one else. Well with that logic, Rivers and Ben should be better qbs then romo to you since they have also broken team records, led the league in ratings and td passes, and that Ben and Eli have won championships. Isn't that what it is about? So many of you would rather win with style points that romo can put up, but those style points dont win championships. Aikman didn't put up the style points, all he did was win which so many of you have forgotten about. So go ahead and keep trying to tell yourself romo can do what you want him to do, and stop trying to trash Ben and Eli because they have done what romo hasn't.

And finally, I know Troy didnt win a Super Bowl by his 39th game. With your logic since romo's stats are so much better then Aikman's after 39 games, that must make romo a better qb. I bet you would be saying after Aikman's 39th game based on his stats, record, etc that he was terrible and should be benched. Since we know how Troy turned out, you can't really predict or judge how good or bad a qb is since Aikman went on to win 3 championships, but he never would have had the chance since he didn't post great #'s like romo has. You would have just kicked Troy to the curb. So ya, keep thinking based on romo's first 39 starts that you know he will turn out to be great and that 39 starts is a measuring stick for success. What if romo sucks it up really bad this year and they go 5-11, are you going to blame Wade, Garrett, Roy, or whoelse? Eventually the excuses are going to have to stop and romo will be held accountable. When this team gets a real head coach and a qb like a Manning, Rivers, or Big Ben, then we can talk about this team in a SuperBowl. So explain to me now how romo is better then these guys, since they have broken their team records, led the league in tds or rating, and have won playoff games and Super Bowls? Thats ok, because you cant!

 

[CowboyMike]

Has romo also had a game with a perfect rating like Ben did in 2007 against the Rams?

No, but he did get pretty near it with a rating of 148.9 against TB in 2006. And did you seriously just use the 2007 Rams as an arguing point to measure how good a QB preformed against them? lol. Also, Big Ben only threw the ball 20 times in that game. 16 out of 20 for 261 yards. Nothing spectacular.

And finally, I know Troy didnt win a Super Bowl by his 39th game. With your logic since romo's stats are so much better then Aikman's after 39 games, that must make romo a better qb. I bet you would be saying after Aikman's 39th game based on his stats, record, etc that he was terrible and should be benched. Since we know how Troy turned out, you can't really predict or judge how good or bad a qb is since Aikman went on to win 3 championships, but he never would have had the chance since he didn't post great #'s like romo has. You would have just kicked Troy to the curb. So ya, keep thinking based on romo's first 39 starts that you know he will turn out to be great and that 39 starts is a measuring stick for success.

So, by your logic, we couldn't have predicted how great Troy would have been after his first 39 games because he sucked and went on to be good. So you're faulting someone (who other than you in this thread, hasn't brought up Aikman) for saying that we can't judge a great quarterback after 39 games.

But yet you have the right to judge Romo after 39 games and say he's no good and won't go anywhere.

You're applying a double standard man. You're arguing against yourself. You don't even see that you're doing it.

 

[Eldorado]

He was a rookie. What the hell is wrong with you? You Romo defenders are going to all time lows now, seriously.

Is it the "Romo lovers" going to all time lows? Or is it just that you can't get over the fact that we actually have a solid QB?

 

[DallasEast]

So, by your logic, we couldn't have predicted how great Troy would have been after his first 39 games because he sucked and went on to be good. So you're faulting someone (who other than you in this thread, hasn't brought up Aikman) for saying that we can't judge a great quarterback after 39 games.

But yet you have the right to judge Romo after 39 games and say he's no good and won't go anywhere.

You're applying a double standard man. You're arguing against yourself. You don't even see that you're doing it.

:clap2: I had considered answering that first and giving a more appropriate response for the whole post later, but you've answered it better than I would have anyway. Good stuff.

 

[stilltheguru]

Is it the "Romo lovers" going to all time lows? Or is it just that you can't get over the fact that we actually have a solid QB?

WHOA WHOA WHOA. I never said Romo wasn't solid. He is a very good quarterback that was on the road to being great until he started messing with all of those starlets and Hollywood bs. It's his fault not mines. 2006 was the best Romo

 

[CowboyMike]

:clap2: I had considered answering that first and giving a more appropriate response for the whole post later, but you've answered it better than I would have anyway. Good stuff.

Thank you. I actually typed my post considering the fact that you had a much longer and better one coming ahead. I had that in mind. So please, do so. Consider mine your prologue.

One more point I'd like to make for RedRaidersFalconsFan: You make the argument that Romo is good because he has a stocked team around him. Reverse that for Aikman. Aikman wasn't good until he had a stocked team around him.

This is a team game, and you can't discount that.

 

[RedRaiderCowboysFan]

Thank you. I actually typed my post considering the fact that you had a much longer and better one coming ahead. I had that in mind. So please, do so. Consider mine your epilogue.

One more point I'd like to make for RedRaidersFalconsFan: You make the argument that Romo is good because he has a stocked team around him. Reverse that for Aikman. Aikman wasn't good until he had a stocked team around him.

This is a team game, and you can't discount that.

I have never claimed I know what will happen, I just have said what I think will or won't happen with romo leading this team. Just like everyone else can say what they think will or want to happen, nobody knows for sure. Aikman came onto a terrible team and the team was built around him and we saw what this team became. And Aikman was plenty good before the team got good around him, Aikman, Emmit, and Irvin wouldn't be who they are today without each other.

And I'm sure Dallas east will have a nice long response to my other post, but nothing he can say can dispute the facts of what Eli, Ben, and Rivers have accomplished and what romo hasn't. Nothing at all, he can give his opinion as to why he is right and why I am wrong, but the facts dont change. And I can be a Cowboys fan and realize that other teams have better players at other positions then what is on this current team.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

I won't argue that romo stats are better then everyone down from #22, even though Schaub has the chance to put up some really good #'s and has since he joined the Texans. Sorry this is so long but wanted to make sure all of your points were addressed. Would rather it be too long then short.

Starting with Manning, just because he is a Giant doesn't mean he is less of a qb then romo simply because he is a Cowboy. If romo had been in Manning's place and it was the Cowboys, you would be saying how great romo played and he was the main reason the team won. So you and many others are trying to justify Manning's performance that it wasn't really him but his entire team while trying to put romo's shortcomings on everyone else. I know its hard for you to imangine that the very best of the NFL doesn't always play in Dallas. Of course Eli didn't win the SuperBowl by himself, but he certainly was a huge part of why they did. But throwing for 6td's and 1 int while winning 3 straight playoff games on the road, not to mention the NFC championship in the coldest game at Lambeau field, and preventing the Patriots from going 19-0 is pretty impressive, for him and the team. But again if that was romo, you would be putting all or 99.9 % the praise upon him.

And Big Ben, considering he was ROY and won 15 straight games and went to the AFC championship as a rookie, then came back the next season to win a Super Bowl. Sure he might not have had the prettiest game but he did enough to win and didn't turn the ball over to become the youngest qb to ever win a SuperBowl. Then in 2007, he was 3rd in tds behind Brady and yes romo with 32 setting a new franchise record also but only had 11 ints and ranked 2nd in rating only behind Brady. And having the sieve for an offensive line he has had, its a wonder how he keeps playing, shows how tough he is. Do you really think romo could take that kind of beating behind that line. And if you want to call the game winning drive against Arizona in the Super Bowl as helping his team, look again. That was a qb putting the team on his back and carrying them down the field to win the game. You may think romo can put a drive like that together in a game, but so far he hasn't done it on the biggest stage in the NFL, just like Manning also did the year before. Has romo also had a game with a perfect rating like Ben did in 2007 against the Rams? Yes they have an awesome defense, but Ben has shown that he can put up big time stats and make plays in the clutch like in the Super Bowl. Until romo does that you can't even mention them in the same breath. Also playing in the cold weather affects the passing game and Ben's stats, unlike playing in the climate controlled Texas Stadium or the new stadium.

Now Phillip Rivers, this past season led the NFL in td passes with 34 breaking another club record, qb rating at 105.5. In 2006 also led the NFL in 4th quarter qb rating. romo has never lead the league in td passes or has never finished the season as the highest rated passer. I know romo has a high 4th quarter rating though. Rivers has also played in an AFC championship, with a torn ACL. Do you think romo would have played with that kind of injury? If he can't play with a hurt pinkie finger, then I really don't think romo would be man enough to play with that kind of injury. You have to respect a player whio plays with a torn ACL. Shows he has heart, also have never heard of any of these guys collapsing in the shower after a loss.

So the favorite argument is that romo only has 39 career starts and is 27-12. Ya, most qb's, esp those drafted so high dont have the luxury of sitting on the bench for 3 plus years and stepping into a team that is loaded with the talent that the team had when romo started playing. The high picks are drafted onto bad teams and won't put up big stats and many wins while they adjust to the NFL with out good or great players aorund them. So to say romo is better then qbs after 39 starts based just on stats and win/losses in the regular season is skewed since romo wasnt a rookie starting on a bad team. If you want to make an accurate comparison to romo after 39 starts, find qbs who sat on the bench for 3 or more seaons for their team and then started to play and see how they compare for 39 games. Or even find qbs who werent on the same team for 3 years before they started to play after having more then 3 years experience. Its common football knowledge that it is better for a rookie to sit and learn instead of just being thrust into the starting lineup. But because of the expecations placed on them and the money they are making, most qb's get thrown into the fire. romo got the benefit of having to sit, and now we see how he plays with all those expectations. Manning so far has lived up the #1 overall pick status, so has Big Ben playing for a team that also had 5 championships. Even now more rookies are playing from day 1 and are showing why they could play as rookies and were deserving of being high #1 picks. (Ryan, Flacco)

Another favorite is that romo has broken team records and that makes him better then most every one else. Well with that logic, Rivers and Ben should be better qbs then romo to you since they have also broken team records, led the league in ratings and td passes, and that Ben and Eli have won championships. Isn't that what it is about? So many of you would rather win with style points that romo can put up, but those style points dont win championships. Aikman didn't put up the style points, all he did was win which so many of you have forgotten about. So go ahead and keep trying to tell yourself romo can do what you want him to do, and stop trying to trash Ben and Eli because they have done what romo hasn't.

And finally, I know Troy didnt win a Super Bowl by his 39th game. With your logic since romo's stats are so much better then Aikman's after 39 games, that must make romo a better qb. I bet you would be saying after Aikman's 39th game based on his stats, record, etc that he was terrible and should be benched. Since we know how Troy turned out, you can't really predict or judge how good or bad a qb is since Aikman went on to win 3 championships, but he never would have had the chance since he didn't post great #'s like romo has. You would have just kicked Troy to the curb. So ya, keep thinking based on romo's first 39 starts that you know he will turn out to be great and that 39 starts is a measuring stick for success. What if romo sucks it up really bad this year and they go 5-11, are you going to blame Wade, Garrett, Roy, or whoelse? Eventually the excuses are going to have to stop and romo will be held accountable. When this team gets a real head coach and a qb like a Manning, Rivers, or Big Ben, then we can talk about this team in a SuperBowl. So explain to me now how romo is better then these guys, since they have broken their team records, led the league in tds or rating, and have won playoff games and Super Bowls? Thats ok, because you cant!

 

[Dodger12]

Dude, you need to learn to read. Look back at the posts. A Cowboys fan said that other Cowboys fans who want to dump Romo are foolish and I agreed. I flat out said that Romo was a good quarterback. I did say that he struggles after December 1 but this is hardly news. I said nothing about his ability to make the Pro Bowl in the future, I simply indicated that he did not make the Pro Bowl last year. So I wasn't blaming Romo. I simply said that he was not a top 5 NFL quarterback. This claim is not as controversial as you make it out to be.

I would have no problem if you yourself thought Romo wasn't a top 5 QB, that's your opinion. But you went further by stating that no one outside of Cowboy land thought Romo was a top 5 QB, as if only a homer can think he's that good, even though he's been selected to multiple Pro-Bowls by coaches, fans and his peers. Then you just wave away the Pro Bowl as a popularity contest littered with undeserving players voted in by fans who stuff ballot boxes. That's just absurd.

As far as Rodgers goes, if you read what I wrote you will see that I did not bank on his future. I even said that he might implode in the future. What I did was point out that last year (past performance), Rodgers' yards, TD's, interceptions, and QB rating numbers were all better than Romo's. Based on last year's numbers, there actually is a good case for rating Rodgers higher than Romo. Since you missed this, let's rehearse, according to stats from NFL.com:
Rodgers 4,038 yards / 28 TD / 13 int / 93.8 rating
Romo 3,448 yards / 26 TD / 14 int / 91.4 rating

Good Lord. You want to take slightly better stats and argue that this somehow proves that Rodgers should be rated higher than Romo but negate Romo's past stats? That's pretty selective. Rodgers barely played better than Romo in a season where Romo broke a finger on his throwing hand. I'm not feeling too good if I can't be statistically better than a QB who misses a quarter of the season and is throwing with four fingers.

I openly agreed that Romo's missing some games may have had an effect on some of these stats. But I also pointed out that qb rating is independent of games played, and that Rodgers threw fewer interceptions than Romo despite the fact that he played in more games.

If your argument hinges on the fact that Rodgers had a better rating by a whole 2.4 points and threw one less interception, then you must love Chad Pendington; he was rated higher than both Romo and Rodgers and threw half the number of interceptions but I'm not knocking down Jerry's door to sign him.

As for my statement about what people outside of Cowboys land think, I did back up what I said with evidence. I cited NFL Network and Football Outsiders specifically, and to this I would add ESPN and commentators on Sporting News. The fact is, no one has produced any contrary evidence, other than the dubious Pro Bowl claim, while I have produced several resources. I've backed up everything that I have said.

"Dubious?" Look up the word. There's nothing doubtful or questionable about the argument that Romo's a Pro Bowl QB. You want to hang on the stats of a 6 and 10 QB that didn't make the pro bowl as evidence of some sort of superiority that qualifies a top 5 ranking yet call the fact that Romo made multiple pro-bowls as a result of his stats a "dubious" claim? That's pretty selective; you use only the stats that support your claim but disregard the rest as dubious.

Eli Manning (14), Donovan McNabb (15), Jay Cutler (16), Ben Roethlisberger (24) are all rated lower than Rodgers and I'd take any one of those QB's over Rodgers any day of week, as would probably most sane NFL fans.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

And Big Ben, considering he was ROY and won 15 straight games and went to the AFC championship as a rookie, then came back the next season to win a Super Bowl. Sure he might not have had the prettiest game but he did enough to win and didn't turn the ball over to become the youngest qb to ever win a SuperBowl.

Actually, Roethlisberger threw two interceptions in Super Bowl XL.

http://www.jt-sw.com/football/boxes/index.nsf/Games/2005-post-sb-sea-pit

Now Phillip Rivers, this past season led the NFL in td passes with 34 breaking another club record, qb rating at 105.5. In 2006 also led the NFL in 4th quarter qb rating. romo has never lead the league in td passes or has never finished the season as the highest rated passer. I know romo has a high 4th quarter rating though. Rivers has also played in an AFC championship, with a torn ACL. Do you think romo would have played with that kind of injury? If he can't play with a hurt pinkie finger, then I really don't think romo would be man enough to play with that kind of injury. You have to respect a player whio plays with a torn ACL. Shows he has heart, also have never heard of any of these guys collapsing in the shower after a loss.

It had little to do with toughness or manliness. Romo couldn't play because he couldn't grip the ball well enough to make accurate throws.

Although a torn ACL may sound worse than a discolated pinky, it isn't necessarily worse from a standpoint of functionality. Different football positions rely more heavily on different parts of the body.

So explain to me now how romo is better then these guys, since they have broken their team records, led the league in tds or rating, and have won playoff games and Super Bowls? Thats ok, because you cant!

Do you realize that Romo holds Cowboys franchise records for most TD passes and passing yards in a season? Did you know that Romo has more career TDs and a higher career passer rating than Rivers?

Do you watch the games...at all?

Point of advice: Criticism of a Cowboys player is valid and acceptable. However, disingenuous criticism of a Cowboys player will normally cause people to question your devotion to the team.