Stopping the New Romo Myth

[ufcrules1]

#284 in this thread

Ok, I read his post but not sure what you disagree about. Are you saying I'm wrong about Romo not being elite? Or are you saying I'm wrong about what both Eli and Flacco have accomplished during their playoff runs?

 

[jobberone]

Ok, I read his post but not sure what you disagree about. Are you saying I'm wrong about Romo not being elite? Or are you saying I'm wrong about what both Eli and Flacco have accomplished during their playoff runs?

If you don't get it then you don't get it. I don't see anyone helping you get there either. In fact your position is not supported by the facts. But I'd be foolish to get into an argument with you over this topic.

 

[ufcrules1]

If you don't get it then you don't get it. I don't see anyone helping you get there either. In fact your position is not supported by the facts. But I'd be foolish to get into an argument with you over this topic.

Right, in other words you have no point at all to your post. Don't call someone out and then not defend your position.

 

[AmericasTeam81]

I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

 

[jobberone]

Right, in other words you have no point at all to your post. Don't call someone out and then not defend your position.

I already told you where to look. PH's post shows that the overwhelming majority of your rhetoric over the last years is wrong about Romo not performing in the clutch. You have been presented data like this numerous times and you continue to put your nonsense on parade entering any thread on Romo to make your proclamations.

It's old, boring and un-factual.

And you weren't called out; merely given information that contradicts your story.

You can have the last word as I have 'defended' my posts.

 

[Idgit]

Ok, I read his post but not sure what you disagree about. Are you saying I'm wrong about Romo not being elite? Or are you saying I'm wrong about what both Eli and Flacco have accomplished during their playoff runs?

The thing about 'elite' is that nobody is going to agree on a definition of what that is. If you want a definition that ignores any quantifiable attempt to measure and compare players at that position or want to tie your definition of elite to a team objective that the QB has limited control of, well, you can. It may even seem reasonable in an argument to try to parse the difference between that unorthodox and very personal version of 'elite' and 'very good.' What does it matter, though, of 9 out of 10 of us agree on one definition and you want to use another? If he doesn't rise to the level of elite by your standard, that's perfectly ok. As long as you recognize by most objective standards he does and that that's what most people are going to look at.

As I always say in these threads, I don't really care. He's good enough to win it all with, that's what matters to me. If he wins a handful of Superbowls and Aaron Rodgers is still quantifiably or subjectively better, well, fine by me. I'll just be here in the corner polishing the trophies.

 

[jobberone]

The thing about 'elite' is that nobody is going to agree on a definition of what that is. If you want a definition that ignores any quantifiable attempt to measure and compare players at that position or want to tie your definition of elite to a team objective that the QB has limited control of, well, you can. It may even seem reasonable in an argument to try to parse the difference between that unorthodox and very personal version of 'elite' and 'very good.' What does it matter, though, of 9 out of 10 of us agree on one definition and you want to use another? If he doesn't rise to the level of elite by your standard, that's perfectly ok. As long as you recognize by most objective standards he does and that that's what most people are going to look at.

As I always say in these threads, I don't really care. He's good enough to win it all with, that's what matters to me. If he wins a handful of Superbowls and Aaron Rodgers is still quantifiably or subjectively better, well, fine by me. I'll just be here in the corner polishing the trophies.

I recommended you get that job which I have done for years. You deserve it and I'm happy for you.

 

[ufcrules1]

I already told you where to look. PH's post shows that the overwhelming majority of your rhetoric over the last years is wrong about Romo not performing in the clutch. You have been presented data like this numerous times and you continue to put your nonsense on parade entering any thread on Romo to make your proclamations.

It's old, boring and un-factual.

And you weren't called out; merely given information that contradicts your story.

You can have the last word as I have 'defended' my posts.

And I have told you and others stats alone don't paint the whole picture and can't be relied on by themselves to define if a player is elite, clutch or what have you. You can't just will for Romo to be what you want him to be and point to random stats and say that it proves your point. It doesn't.

We can all say we think Romo is good enough to win a super bowl but until he actually leads a team there and does it, he will always be remembered as a real good regular season player who did some choking.

In the salary cap era we are currently in, you will never have a perfect team. You might have an outstanding offensive line and enough weapons to dominate and then just have an average defense. You will more than likely have to do something very special to help your team win. Eli has been there and done that, sadly Flacco has too, literally playing like Montana in his last playoff run and super bowl victory.

Thanks for the last word. I will give you that honor next time if you're willing to actually type it out vs throwing out baseless insults.

 

[ufcrules1]

The thing about 'elite' is that nobody is going to agree on a definition of what that is. If you want a definition that ignores any quantifiable attempt to measure and compare players at that position or want to tie your definition of elite to a team objective that the QB has limited control of, well, you can. It may even seem reasonable in an argument to try to parse the difference between that unorthodox and very personal version of 'elite' and 'very good.' What does it matter, though, of 9 out of 10 of us agree on one definition and you want to use another? If he doesn't rise to the level of elite by your standard, that's perfectly ok. As long as you recognize by most objective standards he does and that that's what most people are going to look at.

As I always say in these threads, I don't really care. He's good enough to win it all with, that's what matters to me. If he wins a handful of Superbowls and Aaron Rodgers is still quantifiably or subjectively better, well, fine by me. I'll just be here in the corner polishing the trophies.

9 out of 10 on a Cowboys forum want to agree on their definition of elite because they love a particular Cowboys player? I wonder what everyone else thinks out there? I have never seen anyone outside of this forum call Romo elite.

You're right though, it's all opinions on both sides. With that said, 9 out of 10 people agreeing on the definition of elite on this forum doesn't make them right.

With regards to Romo being good enough to lead his team to a super bowl victory... I hope he is. He certainly had his chance last year and should this year as well.

 

[Idgit]

9 out of 10 on a Cowboys forum want to agree on their definition of elite because they love a particular Cowboys player? I wonder what everyone else thinks out there? I have never seen anyone outside of this forum call Romo elite.

You're right though, it's all opinions on both sides. With that said, 9 out of 10 people agreeing on the definition of elite on this forum doesn't make them right.

With regards to Romo being good enough to lead his team to a super bowl victory... I hope he is. He certainly had his chance last year and should this year as well.

Nobody in their right mind thinks we didn't get farther last season because of the play of Tony Romo. And that includes fans on other boards. Perhaps you just need to read a bit more widely.

 

[ufcrules1]

Nobody in their right mind thinks we didn't get farther last season because of the play of Tony Romo. And that includes fans on other boards. Perhaps you just need to read a bit more widely.

All I will say is our last game was a team loss. Nobody on our team really went above and beyond. It was a tough game vs a tough team who hadn't lost at home all year. Some people want to point to our defense as the culprit but Rodgers being an elite QB is always tough to stop... especially at home. We knew he was going to put up points against us, we just had to put up more than them and we couldn't.

 

[jobberone]

I thought Tony put the ball exactly where it needed to be and Dez made a sensational catch in the GB game. Even the defending CB said it was a catch. That play stands and we likely beat them. I don't cry over calls but the entire league was upset over that including Mara. So there is another situation where Tony made the play to win the game.

It's a team game but you almost always need a quality QB to win it all. People who don't see Tony as a top tier QB just aren't looking objectively. People say these things not because they have some biased opinion of Tony but because it is what it is. When we didn't have a decent QB everyone said so. Now we have a player who is not arguably elite but arguably one of the better QBs to ever play the game.

Now I'm sure that last response will get some OMGs. While football is NOT just a stat game like baseball mostly is, people do factor it in.

 

[CowboyRoy]

9 out of 10 on a Cowboys forum want to agree on their definition of elite because they love a particular Cowboys player? I wonder what everyone else thinks out there? I have never seen anyone outside of this forum call Romo elite.

You're right though, it's all opinions on both sides. With that said, 9 out of 10 people agreeing on the definition of elite on this forum doesn't make them right.

With regards to Romo being good enough to lead his team to a super bowl victory... I hope he is. He certainly had his chance last year and should this year as well.

I have defended Romo more than anyone over the years, but I have never had him at elite. Now last year, his numbers were elite, overall, but his career has not been one that is elite. For me, Brees, Manning, Brady, Rogers are the elite types. Top 5 in the game if you want some kind of a measure.

 

[CowboyRoy]

All I will say is our last game was a team loss. Nobody on our team really went above and beyond. It was a tough game vs a tough team who hadn't lost at home all year. Some people want to point to our defense as the culprit but Rodgers being an elite QB is always tough to stop... especially at home. We knew he was going to put up points against us, we just had to put up more than them and we couldn't.

Ownership and management had no problem blaming the defense as most who watched the game. In particular, the pass rush. Their offseason strategy bares in mind exactly where they thought they needed to improve. All defense with a lean on the pass rush.

Though I always agree that 9 out of 10 times it's a team loss. But I find little fault with the offense for that game.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Nobody in their right mind thinks we didn't get farther last season because of the play of Tony Romo. And that includes fans on other boards. Perhaps you just need to read a bit more widely.

Romo did what he always does. He just did it with less pressure, better coaching, and a better squad around him to allow him to not take so many chances. Those that understand Tony and the Cowboys really well understand that. Certainly at 36 years of age, he isnt going to rediscover himself. The Romo supporters have been telling the haters for years that if Romo had what he had last year, that the mistakes would change and the team would win more games. Romo was never and has never been the biggest problem in Dallas as the laughable Romo haters have claimed for years.

 

[ufcrules1]

Ownership and management had no problem blaming the defense as most who watched the game. In particular, the pass rush. Their offseason strategy bares in mind exactly where they thought they needed to improve. All defense with a lean on the pass rush.

Though I always agree that 9 out of 10 times it's a team loss. But I find little fault with the offense for that game.

Rodgers would have done what he did to almost any defense out there. No team beat them at home last year. We knew they were going to put up points, we just couldn't put up more ourselves. you can't expect to put up 21 points and beat a Rodgers led packers. Our defense was ranked 19th last year which is a little under average. When you have a top Oline, top running game, elite WR & TE, very good QB, then it's a stretch to get the defense to match in this salary cap era we are in. I have a tough time blaming the defense, they played their hearts out all season long. I just chalk that game up to a team loss.

This year it will be interesting to see what happens. We are much better on defense on paper but I think we are much worse at RB. There is always give in take these days in the NFL. You have to be able to go above and beyond to go all the way.

 

[Frozen700]

And I have told you and others stats alone don't paint the whole picture and can't be relied on by themselves to define if a player is elite, clutch or what have you. You can't just will for Romo to be what you want him to be and point to random stats and say that it proves your point. It doesn't.

We can all say we think Romo is good enough to win a super bowl but until he actually leads a team there and does it, he will always be remembered as a real good regular season player who did some choking.

In the salary cap era we are currently in, you will never have a perfect team. You might have an outstanding offensive line and enough weapons to dominate and then just have an average defense. You will more than likely have to do something very special to help your team win. Eli has been there and done that, sadly Flacco has too, literally playing like Montana in his last playoff run and super bowl victory.

Thanks for the last word. I will give you that honor next time if you're willing to actually type it out vs throwing out baseless insults.

Same thing I been trying to tell the Williams defenders. 8 Td's don't tell the whole story.

 

[DFWJC]

Nobody in their right mind thinks we didn't get farther last season because of the play of Tony Romo. And that includes fans on other boards. Perhaps you just need to read a bit more widely.

Still haven't confirmed this, but he might be the only player in NFL history to lead the league in QB rating in both regular season and playoffs of the same season.
He was huge.

 

[Idgit]

Still haven't confirmed this, but he might be the only player in NFL history to lead the league in QB rating in both regular season and playoffs of the same season.
He was huge.

But not elite?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Rodgers would have done what he did to almost any defense out there. No team beat them at home last year. We knew they were going to put up points, we just couldn't put up more ourselves. you can't expect to put up 21 points and beat a Rodgers led packers. Our defense was ranked 19th last year which is a little under average. When you have a top Oline, top running game, elite WR & TE, very good QB, then it's a stretch to get the defense to match in this salary cap era we are in. I have a tough time blaming the defense, they played their hearts out all season long. I just chalk that game up to a team loss.

This year it will be interesting to see what happens. We are much better on defense on paper but I think we are much worse at RB. There is always give in take these days in the NFL. You have to be able to go above and beyond to go all the way.

The 19th ranking was a mirage. Based on real time on the field and efficiency, they were near the bottom of the league. Rogers has certainly carved up many a defense, but it was more than obvious that we couldnt get to him with the pass rush. And let's not forget that he was limping around the field. A truly pathetic performance from a pass rush perspective. And certainly the fact that the D couldn't get off the field would affect the offense and their ability to get the ball back.

Now you can certainly give the defense a pass if you like, but from my perspective, I completely agree with the management that the problem with this team is the defense and the pass rush.

And I will also disagree that we are much worse in the running game. Randle will surprise a lot of people. And I also subscribe to the theory that you dont need a GREAT back behind this line. The run game will continue to be a strength. And AGAIN...........its clear that management agrees with me again based on their off seasons decision in regards to the same.