Question for the Romo fans

[Aikmaniac]

Just heard Mort on Galloway say if Jerry decided to trade him what could he get. He didn't balk, he said a 1st and 3rd, mayber 2 2nds and another in the future, maybe more. Every GM loves this guy.

//thread.

This will be ignored as you know.

 

[Meat-O-Rama]

No one has ever said that Romo is doing something no other QB could do. The point is that with all of the problems this team has, and the limited resources (cap space, draft picks) only so many at a time can be addressed. Thus QB is not high on the priority list. Get a decent o-line that can run and pass block and you get a QB who can be much more efficient. A QB with a career rating of 95+ (top 5 ALL TIME) is not something you throw away.

 

[dragon_mikal]

That is funny. He sure did look like one of them when he gave the game away for the division against the 30th ranked passing defense in the league. Romo 100% is part of the problem here. He isn't the only problem or even the biggest problem, but he sure the hell is part of the problem.

If you are going to blame Romo when he plays poorly than you need to also praise him when he plays well.

Romo is the reason the Cowboys were playing for a division title week 17. It wasn't the defense, it wasn't the running game and it wasn't special teams.

He was great the final half of the season and it finally came crashing to a halt like it was bound to do. It just happened to come crashing down at the worst possible time.

 

[DMAC]

How about a better question for you? What kind of season would you expect the QB's for these teams to have without a real consistent running game?

Seahawks
Commanders
Packers
Vikings
49ers
Falcons

Bengals
Texans
Ravens
Colts
Patriots
Broncos

You missed the point. I'm sure you've read here as many times as I have how the Romo lovers keep stating the "fact" that we are 2-14 to 5-11 without Romo. So they are saying NO OTHER QB would have fared better than 5-11 with this team. Which is just silly.

 

[zack]

Aaron Rodgers has NEVER had a good running game or Oline. Especially this year and yet he still succeeds.. why? Because he understands that not everything around him will be perfect and he knows the most important thing every QB should know...PROTECT THE BALL. Romo had enough of a team around him to win the division this year but ROMO choked and gave that game away himself. It's just more of the same with him.

And guess what....The Packers still ran for more than 500 yards more than the Cowboys this season.....

What about the rest of the teams? It's called balance and flow of an offense and the Cowboys don't have it. Tell me that you can't predict what Dallas is going to do before the snap of the ball?

The bottom line is that he needs help. No he isn't Drew, Brady, or Peyton. Fine, I get that. But he needs a balanced offense with less predictability.

 

[ufcrules1]

So who/what do you want then???

What I don't want is a QB that gets us to 8-8 and an 18th round draft pick. I don't want fools gold. I would love to trade him to a team while he still has value and get a 1st round draft pick for him. KC, Jac, NYJ, Oak, and Buf would all be interested in him. We also have some other players we could trade and get solid picks from. From there build up our trenches and add a safety. Who cares, we role with Orton next year and then we draft a QB in 2014.

 

[DMAC]

No one has ever said that Romo is doing something no other QB could do. The point is that with all of the problems this team has, and the limited resources (cap space, draft picks) only so many at a time can be addressed. Thus QB is not high on the priority list. Get a decent o-line that can run and pass block and you get a QB who can be much more efficient. A QB with a career rating of 95+ (top 5 ALL TIME) is not something you throw away.

Yes they have. Many, many times. They claim we would be as bad as 2-14 without him.

 

[Arkyvarminter]

Posted this on another forum will repost here.

You have to look at almost the entire rest of the team before you look at Romo.

Look at the teams surrounding us in the statistical categories that most correlate to winning in the NFL.

Passer rating allowed - we are bottom five. The others? NO, OAK, PHI, KC. One team with a losing record (and only halfway decent because their QB, who also threw a ton of picks, carried them to it). The rest is the top 3 picks in the draft this upcoming season.

Passer rating - we are in the 5-10 range (9 overall) - Of those top 10 squads, only two missed the playoffs. Can we guess who they were? Again - New Orleans and Dallas. Is there anyone saying Drew Brees is New Orleans biggest problem? Would they be idiots if they were? Absolutely.

Rushing correlates less to winning but we were next to last in the league in rushing offense. The bottom 5 - oh look, it's oakland, jax and arizona with Atlanta thrown in.

It's not that Romo is perfect, he's just about last on the list of things that need fixed with this team. If you get a performance from your QB of the caliber we got from Romo this season and that NO got from Brees, you should stand a very good chance of making the playoffs. After all 80% of those teams did this season. Why didn't we? Because the rest of our team was absolutely dreadful. And if we HADN'T had Romo, with the company we are keeping statistically (teams like oakland, jacksonville, arizona, KC and philly), chances are that we would have had a top 5 pick in the draft.

Romo and Brees allowed their respective teams to achieve mediocrity - which is far better than they should have, when you look at how the rest of the team performed.

I agree with what your saying and I'm not trying to argue with you but Romo has made mistakes at the end of games that cost us that Brees didn't make. You can't get that from Stats unless maybe you use QBR where Romo has several rookies ahead of him.....

 

[Wezsh0T]

That is funny. He sure did look like one of them when he gave the game away for the division against the 30th ranked passing defense in the league. Romo 100% is part of the problem here. He isn't the only problem or even the biggest problem, but he sure the hell is part of the problem.

Wow...just wow. I agree he was a 90% culprit in that final game. In fact, you could probably directly hang 3 of our losses on Romo's performance this year. However, 8 of the wins are directly attributable to Romo's performance. He spent 80% of this year running for his life and still made plays. He barely had a running game to help protect him this year.

Keep the rush from coming up the middle and Romo will perform for you. That middle rush kills him. Yes, it's easy to blame the most visible member of the Cowboys, but fix the freaking OL and you won't have to be thinking Romo is the problem. Remember how the Cowboys OL was crap with Bledsoe and then magically became better when Romo took over? Romo's ability to evade rushers and play street ball has been masking the putrid nature of our OL for years now. Get the man an OL. The running game will follow and then the Cowboys will, once again, have a potent offense. Missing on all those draft picks...Rob Pettiti, Pat McQuistan, Jacob Rogers, Stephen Peterman (actually plays for Detroit now), Brewster...I can't even remember the names of all the OLinemen we busted on.

 

[zack]

I agree with what your saying and I'm not trying to argue with you but Romo has made mistakes at the end of games that cost us that Brees didn't make. You can't get that from Stats unless maybe you use QBR where Romo has several rookies ahead of him.....

I seem to remember Brees throwing quite a few picks this season and they were untimely. Not saying Romo is better, but he threw his fair share this year.

 

[ufcrules1]

And guess what....The Packers still ran for more than 500 yards more than the Cowboys this season.....

What about the rest of the teams? It's called balance and flow of an offense and the Cowboys don't have it. Tell me that you can't predict what Dallas is going to do before the snap of the ball?

The bottom line is that he needs help. No he isn't Drew, Brady, or Peyton. Fine, I get that. But he needs a balanced offense with less predictability.

This is what you don't get. Tony Romo lost that "Win or you're in" game for us all by himself. His running game was good enough, his Oline was good enough, and Washington has a pathetic pass rush. Why on earth did he have an epic meltdown and throw 3 interceptions and have erratic passes all night?

 

[Kilyin]

Well he's certainly no Ryan Mallett.

 

[superpunk]

Aaron Rodgers has NEVER had a good running game or Oline. Especially this year and yet he still succeeds.. why? Because he understands that not everything around him will be perfect and he knows the most important thing every QB should know...PROTECT THE BALL. Romo had enough of a team around him to win the division this year but ROMO choked and gave that game away himself. It's just more of the same with him.

You will not find a more telling stat for team wins and losses than Passer Rating vs. Passer Rating Allowed. Rodgers and Romo's passer ratings are near the top of the league in every season so lets compare passer rating allowed. Since Aaron Rodgers took over in 2008 lets compare (GB on left Dallas on right):

2008: 4th (71.9) 20th (86.2)
2009: 4th (68.6) 16th (83.5)
2010: 1st (67.2) 29th (92.8)
2011: 10th (80.6) 25th (88.4)
2012: 4th (76.8) 29th (94.7)

Average: 4.6 (73.02) 23.8 (89.12)


So, in the stat that correlates most to winning and losing in the NFL, Aaron Rodgers team is ranked 20 spots higher than Dallas on average, and allows a QB rating more than 16 points lower. This isn't a one-time thing, this is the effort Aaron is getting every. single. year. He's getting short fields off of turnovers.

If you still wonder why there's a disparity in results you see between the two teams when the quality of QB play is pretty close, maybe someone else can draw you a roadmap. Since Rodgers took over in GB he's had it better from his supporting cast than almost any QB in the league.

 

[Shinywalrus]

I've read on here so many times that without Romo, we're anywhere from a 2-14 to 5-11 team. Tony is the only reason we were able to stay in contention down to the final Sunday.

What are you basing this on? Are you saying that there is no QB out there that could have taken us to as good as of a record? No RGIII, Cam, Stafford, Ryan, Brady, Peyton, Eli, Ben, Luck? None of these QB's could have done as well on this team as Romo did?

Or are you saying, that with Orton, and only Orton, we would have fared worse?

Just curious as to how delirious some of you really are!

Sorry, but you're not making a compelling point.

RGIII, Ryan, Brady, Peyton, Eli, Ben or Luck may have done as well as Romo did - almost certainly, in fact, but when did we have the opportunity to acquire any of these players? Every single one of those players except for Brady was drafted higher in the first round than we had a pick. If you're intimating that Romo was the wrong choice to be our quarterback, you actually have to make the argument that it was ever within our power to acquire one of these other players.

In short, the people who say that we would likely have been 5-11 without Romo are probably right, not because Peyton wouldn't have taken us to 11-5 (he probably would have) but because the available alternative is a Matt Flynn or Kyle Orton, NOT one of the players you listed.

 

[CATCH17]

I've read on here so many times that without Romo, we're anywhere from a 2-14 to 5-11 team. Tony is the only reason we were able to stay in contention down to the final Sunday.

What are you basing this on? Are you saying that there is no QB out there that could have taken us to as good as of a record? No RGIII, Cam, Stafford, Ryan, Brady, Peyton, Eli, Ben, Luck? None of these QB's could have done as well on this team as Romo did?

Or are you saying, that with Orton, and only Orton, we would have fared worse?

Just curious as to how delirious some of you really are!

I think there is other Quarterbacks out there who could get us in the same position as Tony. The problem is you can't hardly get one of those QB's without being bad or lucky.


Im not ready to give up on Romo but I am ready to start getting more options. He's a good QB but he's got the choke trait.

 

[zack]

This is what you don't get. Tony Romo lost that "Win or you're in" game for us all by himself. His running game was good enough, his Oline was good enough, and Washington has a pathetic pass rush. Why on earth did he have an epic meltdown and throw 3 interceptions and have erratic passes all night?

He didn't play well last week. I get that.

So you think that blitz protection was stellar? You think that running routes down the sideline against the blitz was appropriate considering that the middle is exposed. How many slants did you see? How many crossing routes did you see?

So does this make sense? Two consecutive running plays that net 5 yards. Then go to Shotgun formation, fake a draw and throw a screen to a receiver?

 

[burmafrd]

If your expectation is that your QB needs to come out every game, week in and week out and play flawless football to win games, yes Romo is part of the problem. He will never be a guy like Payton or Brady, and finding a guy like Payton or Brady is pretty dang hard.

If your plan is to build a good football team with a good QB who can occasionally win games for you, and who occasionally your defense or running game needs to pick up, then you can win with Romo. Quite frankly that's a better plan than hoping you win the QB drafting lottery and get one of those generational guys.

you have to remember that ufcrules is proud of the fact that he has been for years the #1 Romo hater on this board

 

[superpunk]

I agree with what your saying and I'm not trying to argue with you but Romo has made mistakes at the end of games that cost us that Brees didn't make. You can't get that from Stats unless maybe you use QBR where Romo has several rookies ahead of him.....

That's not really a comparison we can make though. Brees throws his fair share of pick sixes and such at all sorts of points in the game that get his team behind, change things, etc. An early INT can be just as costly as a late one in terms of winning or losing. It happens to all QBs.

Statistics aren't 100%. They can only point to trends. And the most stunning trend is that QBs who put up the numbers that Brees and Romo put up generally make the playoffs (at an 80% clip this season). So why didn't they? Well looking at passer rating allowed provides a pretty simple answer - the Saints and Cowboys defended the pass and created turnovers at a clip that imitated the worst teams in the league - Oakland, KC and Philly.

It was by virtue of Brees and Romo's outstanding play that their teams even approached .500 - if they had played at a lower level it is statistically likely that we'd be picking in the top 5 of the draft - like the other teams who can't defend the pass or generate turnovers.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

How about a better question for you? What kind of season would you expect the QB's for these teams to have without a real consistent running game?

Packers
Falcons

Bengals
Colts
Patriots
Broncos

Maybe I forgot to delete one...but I don't think any of these teams have a good running game. Or even a real one.

 

[Aven8]

What I don't want is a QB that gets us to 8-8 and an 18th round draft pick. I don't want fools gold. I would love to trade him to a team while he still has value and get a 1st round draft pick for him. KC, Jac, NYJ, Oak, and Buf would all be interested in him. We also have some other players we could trade and get solid picks from. From there build up our trenches and add a safety. Who cares, we role with Orton next year and then we draft a QB in 2014.

I'm sorry I'll take my chances on Romo. We've been there before. What happens when Orton goes 7-9, or 5-11? We get a 7th to a 17th pick. Then what? Wait for years and years. He gives us a chance each and every week. Thats all I ask for from my QB.

Fools gold is the current regime that is making a mess out of things.