Romo Stats Not Stans

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think I did disagree and left it at that. You are the one getting all bent out of shape because I disagreed with you.

No, us used the colorful description of Naive. If you were just going to disagree, then that would sound like this.

I disagree and here is why........................

See the difference?

 

[Rockport]

No, us used the colorful description of Naive. If you were just going to disagree, then that would sound like this.

I disagree and here is why........................

See the difference?

No, I don't see. You should take a chill pill.

 

[Vtwin]

No, he played in New England in basically the same offense, under Bill Parcells.

He played on a similar offense with completely different players. Not on the 2005-06 Dallas Cowboys offense.

It almost sounds like you are saying the players don't matter.

 

[Vtwin]

Again, I was just joking around with that post. I'm not childish and nor am I part of the "Romo Christ Anti Christ factions". I'm sorry that my opinion of Romo doesn't jive with some of the Romo faithfuls on the website but that doesn't make me childish.

Please answer the question I asked directly of you.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think I did disagree and left it at that. You are the one getting all bent out of shape because I disagreed with you.

You didn't use the word naive (post 260)?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

No, I don't see. You should take a chill pill.

I'm not surprised.

 

[Rockport]

You didn't use the word naive (post 260)?

Of course I did. What's wrong with that? Don't be so sensitive.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

He played on a similar offense with completely different players. Not on the 2005-06 Dallas Cowboys offense.

It almost sounds like you are saying the players don't matter.

I understand that but what I am saying is that it would be a much better comparison of Romo and Bledsoe if you looked at his early years in NE, running the same offense, rather then his years in Dallas when he was basically over the hill. Of course, that is JMO.

You don't have to do that but if comparison and honest discussion on the two players is what this is about, then that would seem like a better comparison to me. In all honestly, I suspect that the comparison may still favor Romo but I don't know that to be a fact.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Of course I did. What's wrong with that? Don't be so sensitive.

Naive is not a very flattering term. It is, in fact, against the rules of the board to characterize people in such a way. You are out of bounds there, as you are here. It is not your place to insult and then tell people not to be sensitive about it. It is your place to abide by the rules of the board.

This piece, you had better figure out because there is no wiggle room here.

 

[Rockport]

Naive is not a very flattering term. It is, in fact, against the rules of the board to characterize people in such a way. You are out of bounds there, as you are here. It is not your place to insult and then tell people not to be sensitive about it. It is your place to abide by the rules of the board.

This piece, you had better figure out because there is no wiggle room here.

I disagree about the word being an insult. You are overreacting.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I disagree about the word being an insult. You are overreacting.

Your opinion I suppose. The good thing about this board is that there is a higher court for both you and I. We can test the theory and see how it goes if you like or, we can agree to abide by the rules and move on.

 

[Corso]

This thread went downhill fast.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This thread went downhill fast.

Yep, and you have my apology for that.

 

[Vtwin]

I understand that but what I am saying is that it would be a much better comparison of Romo and Bledsoe if you looked at his early years in NE, running the same offense, rather then his years in Dallas when he was basically over the hill. Of course, that is JMO.

You don't have to do that but if comparison and honest discussion on the two players is what this is about, then that would seem like a better comparison to me. In all honestly, I suspect that the comparison may still favor Romo but I don't know that to be a fact.

I understand your theory but I disagree. Honestly. ;-)

The New England team young Bledsoe played on had a great defense and played in a Super Bowl. They also had one hell of a running back.

I really don't see how you can honestly compare the two QB's that way given the disparity in the many variables they each had to deal with.

Young Bledsoe wouldn't have looked as good on the 2005-06 Cowboys as he did on the SB quality Pats and Young Romo would likely have looked better than he did on the 2005-06 Cowboys had he been able to play on the SB quality Pats.

Much like Brady would look nowhere near as good on last years Cowboys as he does on a Pats team that doesn't have him running for his life while waiting for a receiver to get open down field.

But if course that is just my opinion and we're probably at the point where we should agree to disagree.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I understand your theory but I disagree. Honestly. ;-)

The New England team young Bledsoe played on had a great defense and played in a Super Bowl. They also had one hell of a running back.

I really don't see how you can honestly compare the two QB's that way given the disparity in the many variables they each had to deal with.

Young Bledsoe wouldn't have looked as good on the 2005-06 Cowboys as he did on the SB quality Pats and Young Romo would likely have looked better than he did on the 2005-06 Cowboys had he been able to play on the SB quality Pats.

Much like Brady would look nowhere near as good on last years Cowboys as he does on a Pats team that doesn't have him running for his life while waiting for a receiver to get open down field.

But if course that is just my opinion and we're probably at the point where we should agree to disagree.

Hey, I don't have a problem with this. You make valid points in the comparison. For what it's worth, I think the 2006/7 teams that Romo played on were also pretty talented but that's another discussion.

Perhaps the answer here is that you really can't make an honest evaluation on Romo vs Bledsoe. When Bledsoe was younger, he honestly was a better player. He was never fleet of foot but he was a better passer and he did have better mobility then he did when he was with us.

I mean, the actual point you are making, if I understand it correctly, is not a bad one. In that offense, because of Bledsoe's inability to move, he was a fence post and that was a problem. You don't have to be Mike Vick but you do have to be able to move in the pocket to try and help your protection. I understand that and Bledsoe really could not do that towards the end so Romo was a better option at the time. He could do those thing and it helped us win. I have no issue with that line of thought because it's true. I just don't think that you can base a fair comparison of the two on just that criteria.

If the question is, who was better for our team at the time, no question, it was Romo.

 

[ufcrules1]

The original post you responded to was not for you. The second that you responded to was. This "Wait, I've been told on this board" stuff only serves to lesson the discussion. I don't want to get involved with that stuff. I hear stuff on this board every day that I don't agree with. It is what it is.

I wasn't sure on your first because you didn't quote anyone. So it was confusing who you were talking to. That is cool.. I have no intentions of joking with you going forward. We all see stuff we disagree with every day on the board and debate some of it and go back and fourth.

 

[Corso]

Hey, I don't have a problem with this. You make valid points in the comparison. For what it's worth, I think the 2006/7 teams that Romo played on were also pretty talented but that's another discussion.

Perhaps the answer here is that you really can't make an honest evaluation on Romo vs Bledsoe. When Bledsoe was younger, he honestly was a better player. He was never fleet of foot but he was a better passer and he did have better mobility then he did when he was with us.

I mean, the actual point you are making, if I understand it correctly, is not a bad one. In that offense, because of Bledsoe's inability to move, he was a fence post and that was a problem. You don't have to be Mike Vick but you do have to be able to move in the pocket to try and help your protection. I understand that and Bledsoe really could not do that towards the end so Romo was a better option at the time. He could do those thing and it helped us win. I have no issue with that line of thought because it's true. I just don't think that you can base a fair comparison of the two on just that criteria.

If the question is, who was better for our team at the time, no question, it was Romo.

True in that Bledsoe was a terrific QB in his younger days.
I think people tend to forget the past too easily and look at what they last saw as "gospel".

 

[Vtwin]

Hey, I don't have a problem with this. You make valid points in the comparison. For what it's worth, I think the 2006/7 teams that Romo played on were also pretty talented but that's another discussion.

Perhaps the answer here is that you really can't make an honest evaluation on Romo vs Bledsoe. When Bledsoe was younger, he honestly was a better player. He was never fleet of foot but he was a better passer and he did have better mobility then he did when he was with us.

I mean, the actual point you are making, if I understand it correctly, is not a bad one. In that offense, because of Bledsoe's inability to move, he was a fence post and that was a problem. You don't have to be Mike Vick but you do have to be able to move in the pocket to try and help your protection. I understand that and Bledsoe really could not do that towards the end so Romo was a better option at the time. He could do those thing and it helped us win. I have no issue with that line of thought because it's true. I just don't think that you can base a fair comparison of the two on just that criteria.

If the question is, who was better for our team at the time, no question, it was Romo.

Well my original point was that Brady or Manning would not have the success on last years Cowboys team that Romo did for the same reasons you mention here. Strictly in the hypothetical and assuming no changes to personnel were made. Apple to apples, pluck Romo out put Brady/Manning in. This literally happened with Romo/Bledose which is why I brought it up. You are right that the different places they were in their carreer arcs muddies the waters a bit but it was the best analogy I could come up with.

The strengths that Make Brady and Manning what they are, ability to read and understand the defense, quick getting the ball out, great arm wouldn't do them much good behind that line in that scheme having to put up a lot of points to cover for a bad/injured defense. Brady especially will get rattled under consistent pressure. He had Welker and Gronk to get the ball to quickly to alleviate that when necessary. He has creative and adaptive coaching.

If Romo's mobility was a huge asset and allowed him to make a lot of plays a less mobile pocket passer wouldn't be able to make.

Alex Smith would have done far worse than Brady or Manning.

 

[Vtwin]

I wasn't sure on your first because you didn't quote anyone. So it was confusing who you were talking to. That is cool.. I have no intentions of joking with you going forward. We all see stuff we disagree with every day on the board and debate some of it and go back and fourth.

How come you ignore my question?

LOL

 

[Vtwin]

True in that Bledsoe was a terrific QB in his younger days.
I think people tend to forget the past too easily and look at what they last saw as "gospel".

I'm not one of them for the record. I live in New England and watched Bledsoe a lot. I was very happy to hear he was coming to Dallas.