Bob Sacamano
Benched
- Messages
- 57,084
- Reaction score
- 3
Romo
cuz he's good looking
cuz he's good looking
Bob Sacamano;3262611 said:Romo
cuz he's good looking
Cover 2;3261911 said:Put Romo on those Pitt teams and Romo has AT LEAST two SB rings.
Scranton Tiger;3262083 said:Put me down for Romo. The reason is very simple. It's true Roethlisberger has two rings but to this point he also has something else that Romo has NEVER had. A DOMINATE defense. That luxary all too often is overlooked and never should be. Big Ben can suck all day long and his defense can win the game without him. See Super Bowl 40 and countless other games since he became the starter in 2004. On the other hand if Romo plays poorly, Dallas has a ZERO chance to win the game. He doesn't always have to throw for 300 yards and 3TDs but he can't have a bad game. If he does, we lose. PERIOD. This doesn't mean I think Roethlisberger isn't any good. Obviously he is a good QB. Just has had much more to work with to this point in both their careers. Hopefully that's about to change.
CowboyFan74;3262121 said:Romo is our guy but what I like about Ben is that he has proven he can win from behind...
tyke1doe;3262672 said:And can you tell me when's the last time Romo won a game with a touchdown pass in the last seconds of the game? I'm asking because I really don't recall.
bbgun;3262677 said:Detroit, 2007?
If Romo were on the team they probably wouldn't need a TD in the final seconds to win the game. Although I may be a homer, but I think Romo is a much better QB then Rapelisberger. I'm sure many would disagree with the homer label though.tyke1doe;3262672 said:I doubt it.
Big Ben has been tough to take down while in the grasp. Romo isn't tough to take down while in the grasp.
And can you tell me when's the last time Romo won a game with a touchdown pass in the last seconds of the game? I'm asking because I really don't recall.
bbgun;3262677 said:Detroit, 2007?
the kid 05;3262750 said:Commanders game this season...
Double Trouble;3262756 said:There were several minutes left in the game, no? Certainly not the final seconds.
I do believe you're correct, it came very late in the 4th.the kid 05;3262764 said:if my memory isn't failing me it was with in the last two minutes so not necessarily a "last second" td but a come from behind win non the less.
the kid 05;3262764 said:if my memory isn't failing me it was with in the last two minutes so not necessarily a "last second" td but a come from behind win non the less.
Double Trouble;3262779 said:I looked it up. Over 4 minutes left.
Not that it wasn't important, but it wasn't a last second TD, which was the point someone made earlier.
the kid 05;3262781 said:TD02:41Patrick Crayton 10 Yd Pass From Tony Romo (Nick Folk Kick)
2mins 41 secs left, so with in 3 final minutes of the game. Yet people say "Romo doesn't come in on clutch time". Thats about as true as saying our economy is great.
juck;3261824 said:BEN R.
I feel both have good field vision,nice arms,accurate,escapability,smarts. Ben gets my knod cause he has something that cant be taught,SIZE. His size and toughness to sit and take the hit for the throw makes him a better QB as of now. Opinions?
juck;3261824 said:BEN R.
I feel both have good field vision,nice arms,accurate,escapability,smarts. Ben gets my knod cause he has something that cant be taught,SIZE. His size and toughness to sit and take the hit for the throw makes him a better QB as of now. Opinions?
Cover 2;3262687 said:If Romo were on the team they probably wouldn't need a TD in the final seconds to win the game. Although I may be a homer, but I think Romo is a much better QB then Rapelisberger. I'm sure many would disagree with the homer label though.
The Steelers had an amazing D during their Super Bowl run that I think Romo could have done well with. That and their running game. Rapelisberger was throwing less than 20 times a game during that first Super Bowl run, and I have no idea how many times he threw during the second.
I'll admit I'm ignorant to the last SB run, but on the first one he didn't look impressive at all. It seriously wouldn't surprise me if he got brain damage from the motorcycle accident listening to him talk.
I think he's an above average QB, but I think Romo is better. Pardon my ramblings. I tend to do that from time to time.
Scranton Tiger;3262083 said:Put me down for Romo. The reason is very simple. It's true Roethlisberger has two rings but to this point he also has something else that Romo has NEVER had. A DOMINATE defense. That luxary all too often is overlooked and never should be. Big Ben can suck all day long and his defense can win the game without him. See Super Bowl 40 and countless other games since he became the starter in 2004. On the other hand if Romo plays poorly, Dallas has a ZERO chance to win the game. He doesn't always have to throw for 300 yards and 3TDs but he can't have a bad game. If he does, we lose. PERIOD. This doesn't mean I think Roethlisberger isn't any good. Obviously he is a good QB. Just has had much more to work with to this point in both their careers. Hopefully that's about to change.
Cover 2;3262687 said:If Romo were on the team they probably wouldn't need a TD in the final seconds to win the game. Although I may be a homer, but I think Romo is a much better QB then Rapelisberger. I'm sure many would disagree with the homer label though.
The Steelers had an amazing D during their Super Bowl run that I think Romo could have done well with. That and their running game. Rapelisberger was throwing less than 20 times a game during that first Super Bowl run, and I have no idea how many times he threw during the second.
I'll admit I'm ignorant to the last SB run, but on the first one he didn't look impressive at all. It seriously wouldn't surprise me if he got brain damage from the motorcycle accident listening to him talk.
I think he's an above average QB, but I think Romo is better. Pardon my ramblings. I tend to do that from time to time.