***Rip on Romo Thread***

[ChopBlock]

Romo is what he is. Can't play well with a lead. Parcell's knew it and that's why he called him a 'gunslinger'. IMO he gets overconfident and gets careless with the football by taking unnecessary risks. Nothing's changed.

At 31 and after 6 years of starting, it isn't going to change either.

He's a poor man's Farve. Same style but more turnovers, fewer comebacks and one less SB championship.

 

[Dallas]

At 31 and after 6 years of starting, it isn't going to change either.

He's a poor man's Farve. Same style but more turnovers, fewer comebacks and one less SB championship.

He wants to label Romo like Favre but adds up all of the championships and TDs/INTs Favre has had over his career, but Tony only gets 6 years to Favres how many years in the league? 19? 18?

How long did Favre play in the NFL?

Maybe do a bit better on your comparison next time. We thank you.

 

[tyke1doe]

Games aren't about every call being the perfect one for every moment, they are about execution. As long as the overall game plan was good, which it sure seemed to be until the INT's started, you simply can't blame the play calling.

Yeah, you can. You have to play the averages. You're up by 24 points. That's at least four scores. You have to run time off the clock and, at the least/worst, you have your cannon-leg punter pen the Lions deep, making them drive the length of the field to score, burning precious time.

On top of that, you have a quarterback who has shown a propensity for mishandling leads. You have to take that into consideration. So you call running plays. You have enough in your aresnal to disguise runs. Even if they don't work, you don't put your quarterback in a position to blow the game. You make your defense continue to protect the lead.

 

[dboy214]

Games aren't about every call being the perfect one for every moment, they are about execution. As long as the overall game plan was good, which it sure seemed to be until the INT's started, you simply can't blame the play calling.

my God you defend garrett at all cost. have some sense of reality sheeesh

 

[ChopBlock]

He wants to label Romo like Favre but adds up all of the championships and TDs/INTs Favre has had over his career, but Tony only gets 6 years to Favres how many years in the league? 19? 18?

How long did Favre play in the NFL?

Maybe do a bit better on your comparison next time. We thank you.

Believe it or not, but comparisons to playing styles can be made without the two players having played the same number of years.

If you're hung up on the amount of years they each played then just look the avg's/yr and not just total numbers. Either way Romo is an erratic gunslinger but with less success.

 

[JonJon]

Yeah, you can. You have to play the averages. You're up by 24 points. That's at least four scores. You have to run time off the clock and, at the least/worst, you have your cannon-leg punter pen the Lions deep, making them drive the length of the field to score, burning precious time.

On top of that, you have a quarterback who has shown a propensity for mishandling leads. You have to take that into consideration. So you call running plays. You have enough in your aresnal to disguise runs. Even if they don't work, you don't put your quarterback in a position to blow the game. You make your defense continue to protect the lead.

Nah...that makes way to much sense to actually work.

 

[Stautner]

Why can't I? I wanted to protect 24pts. I wanted to run more. I most certainly can blame the game plan.

This team passes WAY TO *** much.

It's Martzesque, and thats disturbing.

Well, you can if you want to be unreasonable.

With the 1st INT there was still almost 11 minutes in the 3rd Quarter - way too much time to pull in the reigns and risk changing the momentum.

With the second INT, that was the 7th play of that possession, and 5 of the 7 plays were runs. Besides, the pattern was a short one, not dowfield .... none of this was remotely Matrzesque.

The 3rd INT was pure improvisation by Romo, which is where he often gets in trouble.

 

[honyock]

he is really the only QB I can remember who is the catalyst for opposing teams to start their comeback. By far the most bizarre QB for Dallas that I can remember. Has talent by must be missing a gene to competence in situational football.

I just saw Bob Costas on Sunday Night Football do his halftime editorial on Romo. He quoted Don Banks from SI, who calls Romo the league's MPP...Most Pivotal Player. He has maybe a greater capacity than any other QB in the league today to have entire games swing in EITHER direction...Jedi-like brilliance and improvisation, and then the anti-Jedi that showed up in the second half of games 1 and 4 this year. Seemed like a pretty good characterization...MPP. Like I said earlier in this thread...never seen anything remotely like this four-game stretch, every week Romo has been THE story in an incredibly dramatic fashion. He's equal opportunity...gives both Romo-lovers and Romo-bashers something to believe in.

 

[Nirvana]

My thread got deleted so here is my point again: Hire Tony Sparano as Asst HC/OC if the Dolphins fire him. We went 13-3 with him calling the plays. Garrett is a great head coach. We will be better in situational play calling with Sparano. He is a plug-and-play, he knows the system. Garrett can have the final authority on the play run. It will help this team a lot. We are LOADED with talent. This could be the missing link. I think it is. When Sparano left this team went into a tailspin.

p.s.
At least we are not 1-3 like the Eagles. And the Commanders will not be winning the East.

My thread did not get deleted it got moved to the NFL forum.

I have an old breakdown on our collapse after Sparano left. I will dig it up and post it to that thread.

 

[CATCH17]

I just saw Bob Costas on Sunday Night Football do his halftime editorial on Romo. He quoted Don Banks from SI, who calls Romo the league's MPP...Most Pivotal Player. He has maybe a greater capacity than any other QB in the league today to have entire games swing in EITHER direction...Jedi-like brilliance and improvisation, and then the anti-Jedi that showed up in the second half of games 1 and 4 this year. Seemed like a pretty good characterization...MPP. Like I said earlier in this thread...never seen anything remotely like this four-game stretch, every week Romo has been THE story in an incredibly dramatic fashion. He's equal opportunity...gives both Romo-lovers and Romo-bashers something to believe in.

Yeah that was good stuff.

Really makes you think we're destined for 8-8.


I never thought we'd lose a game with our D playing at a high level along with our offense but Romo proved me wrong today.

 

[Zman5]

Well, you can if you want to be unreasonable.

With the 1st INT there was still almost 11 minutes in the 3rd Quarter - way too much time to pull in the reigns and risk changing the momentum.

With the second INT, that was the 7th play of that possession, and 5 of the 7 plays were runs. Besides, the pattern was a short one, not dowfield .... none of this was remotely Matrzesque.

The 3rd INT was pure improvisation by Romo, which is where he often gets in trouble.

On the second INT, those 5 runs went for something like 7,6,4,7, 1 yards. The run game was working. It was 3rd and 2, and coach techmo calls a shot gun pass play. How can you say that is not a bad play calling? I would have either ran it or at least play action pass from a run formation. Why tell the whole world we are going to pass when the down and distance dictated that it could have been more of a run play?

 

[Nirvana]

Yeah, you can. You have to play the averages. You're up by 24 points. That's at least four scores. You have to run time off the clock and, at the least/worst, you have your cannon-leg punter pen the Lions deep, making them drive the length of the field to score, burning precious time.

On top of that, you have a quarterback who has shown a propensity for mishandling leads. You have to take that into consideration. So you call running plays. You have enough in your aresnal to disguise runs. Even if they don't work, you don't put your quarterback in a position to blow the game. You make your defense continue to protect the lead.

This

.....

 

[utrunner07]

I never thought we'd lose a game with our D playing at a high level along with our offense but Romo proved me wrong today.

Romo is all about proving those doubters wrong.

 

[Doomsay]

I just saw Bob Costas on Sunday Night Football do his halftime editorial on Romo. He quoted Don Banks from SI, who calls Romo the league's MPP...Most Pivotal Player. He has maybe a greater capacity than any other QB in the league today to have entire games swing in EITHER direction...Jedi-like brilliance and improvisation, and then the anti-Jedi that showed up in the second half of games 1 and 4 this year. Seemed like a pretty good characterization...MPP. Like I said earlier in this thread...never seen anything remotely like this four-game stretch, every week Romo has been THE story in an incredibly dramatic fashion. He's equal opportunity...gives both Romo-lovers and Romo-bashers something to believe in.

I think that JG puts Romo in a position to be this Svengali - it's not a championship formula, but keeps people interested and distracted.

 

[Doomsay]

Yeah, you can. You have to play the averages. You're up by 24 points. That's at least four scores. You have to run time off the clock and, at the least/worst, you have your cannon-leg punter pen the Lions deep, making them drive the length of the field to score, burning precious time.

On top of that, you have a quarterback who has shown a propensity for mishandling leads. You have to take that into consideration. So you call running plays. You have enough in your aresnal to disguise runs. Even if they don't work, you don't put your quarterback in a position to blow the game. You make your defense continue to protect the lead.

It's what a winning coach would do. You don't risk giving up points and momentum quickly especially after a pic 6. There is no dishonor in preserving a lead, just disgrace from epically squandering one like JG and Tony did today.

 

[JonJon]

Since I am a boxing fan (apparent by my avatar), I think the best analogy for Romo is like the brawling boxer than only knows how to fight going forward but doesn't have any defense. Even when the fight is literally won in the final round and all the boxer has to do is not get knocked out and he wins, the boxer still presses forward. That style will get you some wins by knockout, but will also get you some losses by knockout. You will win fights like that against tomato cans, but when you fight someone that knows when to hold them and when to throw them, when to bob and weave and when to jab, when to protect yourself and when to go for the kill, you will get knocked out.

This is Romo. All he knows how to do is fight going forward. He's going to keep going forward even if the game is literally won. Today he tried it, and got wobbled badly. Instead of covering up, he still kept coming forward, until he eventually got his self knocked out and lost the game.

 

[utrunner07]

Since I am a boxing fan (apparent by my avatar), I think the best analogy for Romo is like the brawling boxer than only knows how to fight going forward but doesn't have any defense. Even when the fight is literally won in the final round and all the boxer has to do is not get knocked out and he wins, the boxer still presses forward. That style will get you some wins by knockout, but will also get you some losses by knockout. You will win fights like that against tomato cans, but when you fight someone that knows when to hold them and when to throw them, when to bob and weave and when to jab, when to protect yourself and when to go for the kill, you will get knocked out.

This is Romo. All he knows how to do is fight going forward. He's going to keep going forward even if the game is literally won. Today he tried it, and got wobbled badly. Instead of covering up, he still kept coming forward, until he eventually got his self knocked out and lost the game.

Good stuff.

 

[Zman5]

Romo's sand lot tendencies will either win you some games you should have not won(Deadskins game) or lose games you should have won(Jets, Lions).

It's up to the coaching staff to manage his tendencies to get the most out of him.

 

[Lodeus]

I have to if we draft a guy like Flacco or Sanchez, we will still lose.

 

[dboy214]

Since I am a boxing fan (apparent by my avatar), I think the best analogy for Romo is like the brawling boxer than only knows how to fight going forward but doesn't have any defense. Even when the fight is literally won in the final round and all the boxer has to do is not get knocked out and he wins, the boxer still presses forward. That style will get you some wins by knockout, but will also get you some losses by knockout. You will win fights like that against tomato cans, but when you fight someone that knows when to hold them and when to throw them, when to bob and weave and when to jab, when to protect yourself and when to go for the kill, you will get knocked out.

This is Romo. All he knows how to do is fight going forward. He's going to keep going forward even if the game is literally won. Today he tried it, and got wobbled badly. Instead of covering up, he still kept coming forward, until he eventually got his self knocked out and lost the game.

yeah give me mayweather at qb. technical, defensive, few mistakes.