Sturm: On the Romo Signing

[Wood]

You don't "move on" from a franchise QB unless he just can't play anymore. Which is clearly not the case with Romo.

These guys are rare. You can spend 20 plus years looking for a QB who can be considered among the best at his position. When you find one, you keep him at all costs and build around him.

Now if you don't believe Romo is franchise caliber, none of this matters. I do though. So resigning him was the only option. Of course I'd have liked it to be less costly but it is what it is.

If the team drafts properly and consistently takes QBs in draft (like sturm was mentioning) franchise QB come thru more frequently. Now in Cowboys case they operate like taking QB in draft somehow will damage the phyche of starting QB. Results are as expected....franchise QB are rare occurrence. Again we are throwing around franchise QB title little too loosely for my liking because I have never considered QB who has one playoff victory (regardless of whats going on around him) a franchise QB.

 

[Idgit]

The ONLY game that you could even come CLOSE to pinning on Romo, is the Washington game. But even that game I would say the biggest problem wasn't Romo's 3 INT's, but the fact that Alfred Morris ran 200 yards with a far from 100% RGIII at QB.

Lets actually look at the other games:
2006 Seahawks Playoff Game: 189 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT's, 59% Completion Percentage
2007 Giants Playoff Game: 201 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 50% Completion Percentage
2008 Eagles Game (Final Game of the season): 189 yards, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 54% Completion Percentage. Despite playing the second half with a rib injury, that caused him to pass out in the shower after the game.
2009 Eagles Final Game of the season, for the NFC Championship:
311 yards, 2 TD's, 1 INT, 70% Completion Percentage
2009 Eagles Playoff Game: 244 yards, 2 TD's, 0 INT's, 65% Completion Percentage (Romo was excellent in this game)
2009 Vikings Playoff Game: 198 yards, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 63% Completion Percentage (Despite the fact he was sacked 6 times). The reason we lost this game was the OL couldn't even slow down the Vikings DL.
2011 Giants Game (final Game of the season): 289 yards, 2 TD's, 1 INT, 78% Completion Percentage, despite being sacks 6 times. Romo was not the reason we lost this game, he was the only reason we where even IN this ball game.
2012 Commanders Game (final game of the season): 218 yards, 2 TD's, 3 INT's, 54%.

If you look at all the win or go home games, he has had exactly one multi interception game. And no absolute stinker games, the closest thing to an absolute stinker is the Commander game where he still throws 2 TD's, and for over 200 yards.

I agree with your overall point, but don't see the sense in defending Romo's WAS game from last season. He took too many chances with the ball and it killed us. In particular, we started hot came out with a big return early (the play with Wilber's absolutely crushing block to spring the good return), and then Romo's pick killed that early momentum.

The late pick on the outlet pass to Murray on the other side of the field was a backbreaker, too.

He made his share of positive plays in that game, too, but the three big negative plays more than offset that.

I know the guy gets pointlessly roasted in a lot of situations for the failure of the team, and it's annoying, and it's unfair. But you're not going to win playoff games or playoff qualifying games playing as carelessly with the football as Romo did in the season ender last year. And he's said as much, himself.

 

[btcutter]

Nothing is a given. Romo could have a career ending injury.... You would have more resources to allocate to other positions in the future if you had not resigned him.

So you can't sign a player because you worry about injuries in football? That's not a sound argument.
Allocate to other positions and those players could get injured too.

Like Sturm said. When you have a very good QB, you keep him unless you have a better one in the pipelines.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

So you can't sign a player because you worry about injuries in football? That's not a sound argument.
Allocate to other positions and those players could get injured too.

Like Sturm said. When you have a very good QB, you keep him unless you have a better one in the pipelines.

No my point is that anything could happen. Letting him go and sucking for one year doesn't guarantee that you will get better. However signing him doesn't mean you will experience more success either. The team as a whole isn't very good IMO. They are not good enough to justify allocating so many resources into one player when many pieces are missing before we are a SB contender.

 

[btcutter]

People continues to point to Romo's playoff record as his fallacy. I agree he has made some boneheaded plays so he is far from perfect.

Do people realize that teams that makes the playoffs are in general more complete teams and better coached? You maybe able to masked your team weakness in regular season but come playoff time your teams weaknesses will get exposed. That's typically why the more complete teams moves on.

Besides the Cowboy team in 09 which ran into an ultra hot Giants team do anyone realistically think any of the other Cowboys teams since had a chance to advance deep into the playoffs? or believed we resembled a complete team?

 

[jterrell]

I think he is. Maybe its because he is a Packer fan and not a Cowboy fan that he can be objective.

With Romo, the core of this team, aging vets like Ware, Witten and Ratliff, can cling to some small semblance of hope that they can get to the post season and compete.

It is because he actually loves his work.

It shows.

 

[Echo9]

What's really amazing is what you just admitted. You don't want to tell people you're a Cowboys fan because you don't want to have to defend their starting QB and that doesn't tell you anything? See, I'm not hesitant at all because when the subject comes up, I'm willing to admit the truth. I tell them great stats, has some great games but keeps letting me down in the end and since I'm not in charge of the team all I can do cheer for him to find success next year.

See here's where you make a mistake. He doesn't want to admit being a Cowboy fan and have to defend Romo because he immediately knows that he's now stuck in a conversation with someone who buys into the shallow and flawed arguments that swirl around the Cowboys. He's stuck trying to talk sense into someone who take a blurb from Donovan McNabb et al. and treats it as gospel.

It can be tiring to try to get the whole story out to someone who just eats up the spicy headlines and cherry picks what he wants to hear.


And yes, I am full aware of the irony of my post.

 

[Nation]

http://img21.*************/img21/5646/screenshot20130402at123.png

 

[btcutter]

No my point is that anything could happen. Letting him go and sucking for one year doesn't guarantee that you will get better. However signing him doesn't mean you will experience more success either. The team as a whole isn't very good IMO. They are not good enough to justify allocating so many resources into one player when many pieces are missing before we are a SB contender.

I guess I disagree that siging a very good QB hinders our ability to improve. If every team is given the chance of signing a very good QB, they would all do it in a heartbeat. That's the current price for a good QB. Remember Michael Vick signed a $100 M contract with Phili? The bigger issues is our front office's ability to run a successful organization. No one trust them to be able to draft a developmental QB and groom him properly. But that's another HUGE thread.

 

[Wood]

No my point is that anything could happen. Letting him go and sucking for one year doesn't guarantee that you will get better. However signing him doesn't mean you will experience more success either. The team as a whole isn't very good IMO. They are not good enough to justify allocating so many resources into one player when many pieces are missing before we are a SB contender.

I think that is very valid point and lost by some.

 

[Wood]

http://img21.*************/img21/5646/screenshot20130402at123.png

of that group I only see Matt Ryan as only one who can and will change his trajectory.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

I guess I disagree that siging a very good QB hinders our ability to improve. If every team is given the chance of signing a very good QB, they would all do it in a heartbeat. That's the current price for a good QB. Remember Michael Vick signed a $100 M contract with Phili? The bigger issues is our front office's ability to run a successful organization. No one trust them to be able to draft a developmental QB and groom him properly. But that's another HUGE thread.

Yeah I guess we just have to agree to disagree. The cap management is the bigger issue IMO. I've never thought Romo was the problem. You can win with Romo, he just needs more support than he is getting. My big worry is that we will have too much money wrapped up in an aging core and unable to secure our young core.

 

[erod]

Simple truth.

There is no QB on the planet that could have gotten this puke bucket of a team deep in the playoffs the past few years.

It's had the wrong kind of fatal flaws. Disastrous offensive line, no pass rush, and terrible safeties.

Roger Staubach would have been 8-8 last year here, too. Aikman would have been worse because he can't run for his ever-loving life like Romo and Staubach can.

 

[DFWJC]

of that group I only see Matt Ryan as only one who can and will change his trajectory.

He's goping to win more playoff games, no doubt.

Of course, plug any one of those QBs into that team and they would win just as much.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Peter King ‏@SI_PeterKing 6m
Some Tony Romo analysis coming in Tuesday column. Up in about an hour. You Romo haters will not be pleased.
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite More

 

[jjktkk]

No my point is that anything could happen. Letting him go and sucking for one year doesn't guarantee that you will get better. However signing him doesn't mean you will experience more success either. The team as a whole isn't very good IMO. They are not good enough to justify allocating so many resources into one player when many pieces are missing before we are a SB contender.

You really don't have a point, tbh. Jerry views Romo as a franchise qb. Agree, or disagree, but you don't just disgard franchise qbs. You continue to try and build the team around him. This team does have holes, but there is enough talent to contend with, provided Dallas continues add to the existing core.

 

[zrinkill]

Now in Cowboys case they operate like taking QB in draft somehow will damage the phyche of starting QB.

Complete conjecture on your part bordering on fabricating scenarios that fit your negative anti-Cowboy viewpoint.

 

[rocboy22]

See here's where you make a mistake. He doesn't want to admit being a Cowboy fan and have to defend Romo because he immediately knows that he's now stuck in a conversation with someone who buys into the shallow and flawed arguments that swirl around the Cowboys. He's stuck trying to talk sense into someone who take a blurb from Donovan McNabb et al. and treats it as gospel.

It can be tiring to try to get the whole story out to someone who just eats up the spicy headlines and cherry picks what he wants to hear.


And yes, I am full aware of the irony of my post.

I almost made the same post, but didn't due to the irony!!! It's just worse having to do it in person!

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

You really don't have a point, tbh. Jerry views Romo as a franchise qb. Agree, or disagree, but you don't just disgard franchise qbs. You continue to try and build the team around him. This team does have holes, but there is enough talent to contend with, provided Dallas continues add to the existing core.

Okay....I think my point has been very clear throughout the whole thread. The team is not in the right position to invest so much of its limited assets into one piece. They are not good enough.

 

[rocboy22]

Okay....I think my point has been very clear throughout the whole thread. The team is not in the right position to invest so much of its limited assets into one piece. They are not good enough.

But if they had no QB they wouldn't be good enough, either. That's why it seems there is no point, or the point at least doesn't make any sense.