Parcells - Romo

[rcaldw]

I offer an OPINION on Parcell's view of Tony Romo.

1. When some people were calling for Drew Henson, talking up Tony Romo was an easy thing to do. Didn't offer any fodder for "replace Bledsoe", only served to quiet down any talk of "play Henson."

2. To talk up Tony Romo this preseason was an easy thing to do, not only because Parcells genuinely likes him, but because it was going to ease any potential concerns when the inevitable happened and he was done with the Henson experiment. Remember, Parcells said that he felt it was important to have SOMETHING in the works in terms of a future at QB, he owed that to the franchise. (i.e., "Now see, I haven't left you with an empty cupboard, I've been working on this.")

3. In reality Parcells sees Tony Romo as a genuine backup QB, but not necessarily a full-time starter, and certainly not ready right now.

4. Drew Bledsoe will be his man until the Cowboys are out of playoff contention, if they ever are.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

I offer an OPINION on Parcell's view of Tony Romo.

1. When some people were calling for Drew Henson, talking up Tony Romo was an easy thing to do. Didn't offer any fodder for "replace Bledsoe", only served to quiet down any talk of "play Henson."

2. To talk up Tony Romo this preseason was an easy thing to do, not only because Parcells genuinely likes him, but because it was going to ease any potential concerns when the inevitable happened and he was done with the Henson experiment. Remember, Parcells said that he felt it was important to have SOMETHING in the works in terms of a future at QB, he owed that to the franchise. (i.e., "Now see, I haven't left you with an empty cupboard, I've been working on this.")

3. In reality Parcells sees Tony Romo as a genuine backup QB, but not necessarily a full-time starter, and certainly not ready right now.

4. Drew Bledsoe will be his man until the Cowboys are out of playoff contention, if they ever are.

If he's not ready now...he NEVER will be. He's been here for 3+ years...it's now or never.

 

[SultanOfSix]

I don't know about this. Remember, in preseason, there were whisperings from both Peter King and Mortenson that BP felt that Romo could actually start this year. The more this Bledsoe-Romo saga continues, and if Bledsoe continues his poor play in big games, the more it seems likely that these statements will be reality soon.

That doesn't bode well for the the notion that BP believes Romo is just a back-up QB.

 

[theogt]

I offer an OPINION on Parcell's view of Tony Romo.

1. When some people were calling for Drew Henson, talking up Tony Romo was an easy thing to do. Didn't offer any fodder for "replace Bledsoe", only served to quiet down any talk of "play Henson."

2. To talk up Tony Romo this preseason was an easy thing to do, not only because Parcells genuinely likes him, but because it was going to ease any potential concerns when the inevitable happened and he was done with the Henson experiment. Remember, Parcells said that he felt it was important to have SOMETHING in the works in terms of a future at QB, he owed that to the franchise. (i.e., "Now see, I haven't left you with an empty cupboard, I've been working on this.")

3. In reality Parcells sees Tony Romo as a genuine backup QB, but not necessarily a full-time starter, and certainly not ready right now.

4. Drew Bledsoe will be his man until the Cowboys are out of playoff contention, if they ever are.

This may be true, but there's that little problem with the pre-season -- meaning that, despite the level of his opponents, he looked pretty darn good in both physical and mental aspects of the game.

 

[rcaldw]

I don't know about this. Remember, in preseason, there were whisperings from both Peter King and Mortenson that BP felt that Romo could actually start this year. The more this Bledsoe-Romo saga continues, the more it seems likely that these statements will be reality soon.

That doesn't bode well for the the notion that BP believes Romo is just a back-up QB.

I actually hope you are right Sultan, but my feeling is that if he really thought that Romo was "all that", this would have been the absolute time to make the switch. You have Bledsoe coming off a bad performance, you would have had Romo's first game at home against a very weak defense in the Texans, and his next game a home matchup against the Giants.

You couldn't ask for a better scenario IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE that he is THAT CLOSE to unseating Bledsoe. The only conclusion I'm left with is that Parcells doesn't really consider the two to be that close at the moment.

 

[Martice]

I offer an OPINION on Parcell's view of Tony Romo.

1. When some people were calling for Drew Henson, talking up Tony Romo was an easy thing to do. Didn't offer any fodder for "replace Bledsoe", only served to quiet down any talk of "play Henson."

2. To talk up Tony Romo this preseason was an easy thing to do, not only because Parcells genuinely likes him, but because it was going to ease any potential concerns when the inevitable happened and he was done with the Henson experiment. Remember, Parcells said that he felt it was important to have SOMETHING in the works in terms of a future at QB, he owed that to the franchise.

3. In reality Parcells sees Tony Romo as a genuine backup QB, but not necessarily a full-time starter, and certainly not ready right now.

4. Drew Bledsoe will be his man until the Cowboys are out of playoff contention, if they ever are.

Good analysis. However, I do see that Romo probably plays well enough to start but not overwhelmingly so at this point in his career. Then again, Drew falls into that category as well even after 14 years of experience.

Seriously speaking. Of course I don't think Romo is going to come in and blaze the NFL but I also believe he can't make moreof the same bone head decisions that Drew makes. Even with limited experience.

Good Post.

 

[Stautner]

I offer an OPINION on Parcell's view of Tony Romo.

1. When some people were calling for Drew Henson, talking up Tony Romo was an easy thing to do. Didn't offer any fodder for "replace Bledsoe", only served to quiet down any talk of "play Henson."

2. To talk up Tony Romo this preseason was an easy thing to do, not only because Parcells genuinely likes him, but because it was going to ease any potential concerns when the inevitable happened and he was done with the Henson experiment. Remember, Parcells said that he felt it was important to have SOMETHING in the works in terms of a future at QB, he owed that to the franchise. (i.e., "Now see, I haven't left you with an empty cupboard, I've been working on this.")

3. In reality Parcells sees Tony Romo as a genuine backup QB, but not necessarily a full-time starter, and certainly not ready right now.

4. Drew Bledsoe will be his man until the Cowboys are out of playoff contention, if they ever are.

This is an intersting theory, but pretty far fetched in my mind that Parcells would go to such great lengths to influence people to quit thinking about and promoting Henson.

Particualary this preseason - the vast majority of people were already off the Henson bandwagon anyway.

Besides, Parcells isn't particularly known for caring what "people" think or for coddling the fans and media.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

This may be true, but there's that little problem with the pre-season -- meaning that, despite the level of his opponents, he looked pretty darn good in both physical and mental aspects of the game.

I was at the Seattle game this pre-season and that's exactly what I was looking for...and Romo impressed me greatly. He was better then I expected...a pleasant surprise. This is the big reason I'm clamouring for Romo now...I wa impressed with what I saw in person. Played smart, made good decisions, moved side to side to avoid rush and buy time, and ran the ball when he had to.

With Romo we had 3 and 4 instead of 3 and 15 like we would have with Bledsoe...

I'm sorry to the Bledsoe faithful's, but we absolutly can NOT go anywhere in the playoffs with Drew...we can't. Our only chance is with Romo...really. I don't care how green he is...

 

[superpunk]

When Romo is the better option, he will start. Parcells has never shied away from making a change, with any player, no matter how much he likes him, or how entrenched as one of "Parcells Guys" that player is. If someone better is on the team, he will start.

At this point, Romo doesn't qualify. These terrible, terrible games are out of character for Bledsoe. He's not that bad - that we know of.

If he keeps it up, and proves that he is, that bad, Romo will get the nod. Right now, Bledsoe gives us the best chance to win.

 

[theogt]

When Romo is the better option, he will start. Parcells has never shied away from making a change, with any player, no matter how much he likes him, or how entrenched as one of "Parcells Guys" that player is. If someone better is on the team, he will start.

At this point, Romo doesn't qualify. These terrible, terrible games are out of character for Bledsoe. He's not that bad - that we know of.

If he keeps it up, and proves that he is, that bad, Romo will get the nod. Right now, Bledsoe gives us the best chance to win.

These first four games are on par with the last 7 games of last season, actually.

 

[rcaldw]

This is an intersting theory, but a pretty far fetched in my mind that Parcells would go to such great lengths to influence people to quit thinking about and promoting Henson.

Particualary this preseason - the vast majority of people were already off the Henson bandwagon anyway.

Stautner, just to be clear on my opinion, if Parcells "used" Romo in this way, it would have only been during that brief time when the Dallas community was pressing pretty hard about why can't we see Henson.

I don't think he was doing that THIS PRESEASON. I DO think, however, that Parcells is sensitive to Jerry Jones' desire, to have SOME FUTURE in place at QB before his time here is done. Thus, talking up Tony gives hope to Jerry and the fanbase even while in his mind, Romo isn't that close to unseating Bledsoe.

 

[Portland Fanatic]

When Romo is the better option, he will start. Parcells has never shied away from making a change, with any player, no matter how much he likes him, or how entrenched as one of "Parcells Guys" that player is. If someone better is on the team, he will start.

At this point, Romo doesn't qualify. These terrible, terrible games are out of character for Bledsoe. He's not that bad - that we know of.

If he keeps it up, and proves that he is, that bad, Romo will get the nod. Right now, Bledsoe gives us the best chance to win.

I completely disagree...this is exactly what we have in Bledsoe. He will put up great numbers against below .500 teams and kill us against teams over .500 or teams with a good pass rush. His history more then proves this over and over again.

 

[rcaldw]

When Romo is the better option, he will start. Parcells has never shied away from making a change, with any player, no matter how much he likes him, or how entrenched as one of "Parcells Guys" that player is. If someone better is on the team, he will start.

At this point, Romo doesn't qualify. These terrible, terrible games are out of character for Bledsoe. He's not that bad - that we know of.

If he keeps it up, and proves that he is, that bad, Romo will get the nod. Right now, Bledsoe gives us the best chance to win.

Superpunk you just spoke to what I'm saying. Despite the rumors by Peter King and others, I just don't think that Parcells really believes that Romo is that close to Bledsoe right now in the ability to guide a team to victory consistently, and that is why Bledsoe is a fixture until this team is eliminated from the playoff picture.

 

[superpunk]

These first four games are on par with the last 7 games of last season, actually.

They're much worse. Considering the road cones we had at tackle last season, I don't think you can legitimately look anyone in the eye and say "Yes - those 7 games are an accurate test sample for Drew Bledsoe." The blocking is much better this year, and he's screwing up. He may very well have lost it. But I don't believe it. Lots of QBs have a few tough games. Ask Carson Palmer. Legitimately considered to be a top 3 QB in the league, he's thrown 4 INTs, lost 4 fumbles, and been sacked 5 more times than Bledsoe. Ask Matt Hasselbeck, who has the same INT total as Bledsoe in less attempts.

Maybe these QBs have completely lost it, a la Culpepper.

But I don't believe it yet.

 

[superpunk]

I completely disagree...this is exactly what we have in Bledsoe.

Well then, you are completely wrong.

Look at Bledsoe's career TO's per game, then look at games against Jax and Philly.

It's not even close to par for the course for Bledsoe.

 

[theogt]

They're much worse. Considering the road cones we had at tackle last season, I don't think you can legitimately look anyone in the eye and say "Yes - those 7 games are an accurate test sample for Drew Bledsoe." The blocking is much better this year, and he's screwing up. He may very well have lost it. But I don't believe it. Lots of QBs have a few tough games. Ask Carson Palmer. Legitimately considered to be a top 3 QB in the league, he's thrown 4 INTs, lost 4 fumbles, and been sacked 5 more times than Bledsoe. Ask Matt Hasselbeck, who has the same INT total as Bledsoe in less attempts.

Maybe these QBs have completely lost it, a la Culpepper.

But I don't believe it yet.

So he's getting worse with better talent. Sounds like the product of being an over-the-hill QB to me.

 

[Martice]

Stautner, just to be clear on my opinion, if Parcells "used" Romo in this way, it would have only been during that brief time when the Dallas community was pressing pretty hard about why can't we see Henson.

I don't think he was doing that THIS PRESEASON. I DO think, however, that Parcells is sensitive to Jerry Jones' desire, to have SOME FUTURE in place at QB before his time here is done. Thus, talking up Tony gives hope to Jerry and the fanbase even while in his mind, Romo isn't that close to unseating Bledsoe.

Hmm... Damn it get's more interesting by the moment. What if this scenario were true. Romo is all smoke and mirrors and we are one Drew injury away from being led by J.P. Losman the second. Think about it....... NOT!!!

I know what I saw and this guy is solid at least. Then again I'm no QB coach either but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night. With my wife.....

 

[superpunk]

Superpunk you just spoke to what I'm saying. Despite the rumors by Peter King and others, I just don't think that Parcells really believes that Romo is that close to Bledsoe right now in the ability to guide a team to victory consistently, and that is why Bledsoe is a fixture until this team is eliminated from the playoff picture.

Basically, I agree. What reason do we have to believe that Parcells would not play the best player? Do we have psychiatric reports confirming his masochism? Are we regretting all these talented players we've let go, Pete Hunter?

But I do not think it will take playoff elimination to replace Bledsoe. Honestly, I think one more stinker like we've seen, and Bledsoe is out. I do believe the rope is short. Parcells doesn't believe what he's seeing on gameday either. Once it's confirmed, he'll yank him very quickly.

 

[RCowboyFan]

When Romo is the better option, he will start. Parcells has never shied away from making a change, with any player, no matter how much he likes him, or how entrenched as one of "Parcells Guys" that player is. If someone better is on the team, he will start.

At this point, Romo doesn't qualify. These terrible, terrible games are out of character for Bledsoe. He's not that bad - that we know of.

If he keeps it up, and proves that he is, that bad, Romo will get the nod. Right now, Bledsoe gives us the best chance to win.

No, he is that bad. All off season some of us have been singing the same song, being labeled Bledsoe haters etc.

On the road, when pressure is on, Bledsoe always has been bad. At home, it seems to be a different story. Watch Houston game, he will be good and most likely against Gaints too.

Then against Panthers I expect another meltdown. I hope I am wrong, and he totally plays well here on out. I am not saying he can't throw a bad pass here and there, but what I am saying is, he shouldn't throw back breaking type of ints or fumbles.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Stautner, just to be clear on my opinion, if Parcells "used" Romo in this way, it would have only been during that brief time when the Dallas community was pressing pretty hard about why can't we see Henson.

I don't think he was doing that THIS PRESEASON. I DO think, however, that Parcells is sensitive to Jerry Jones' desire, to have SOME FUTURE in place at QB before his time here is done. Thus, talking up Tony gives hope to Jerry and the fanbase even while in his mind, Romo isn't that close to unseating Bledsoe.

Despite what some fans think Peter King and Mortenson do talk to Parcells and King, especially does have a pretty close relationship with him, dating back to King's days at Newsday when Parcells was with the G-men.

When King began to openly write about Romo possibly taking over the reigns at some point early in the season, if Bledsoe struggled in the first few games, he didn't come up with that on his own and Parcells didn't whisper it to him to appease Jerry or take attention away from Drew Henson.

I want a change, but I recognize that it's not that easy for a Head Coach. Replacing Bledsoe has major ramifications for every player on the roster of a team that was expected to contend. As a Head Coach you have to be cautious about such a change. I don't like it, but I do understand it.

Bledsoe better pick up his game and hope the OL figures out how to pick up a blitz or Romo-time could be closer than anyone believes.