Thoughts on back up QB for this season....

[RCowboyFan]

I do agree that there are examples of young QBs coming in and playing well. Favre did it with Majikowski (sp?), Roath did it in Pittsburgh, Everybody knows the Brady story. System and circumstances have so much to do with success of QBs in the NFL. I agree that patients are important but I will tell you that I do not believe in developing two young QBs at the same time. I think that it is time we make a decision on Romo and Henson. One or the other IMO. We need an experienced back up QB. If Bledsoe goes down, for a period of 4 to 5 games, in our division, we would be done. All teams are two close right now. If we lost Bledsoe for the season, we would probably finish the string but if the injury were a few games, an experienced back up could mean the difference in making the playoffs and going home. JMO.

Or Romo/Henson could prove to be Simms/Brady when given the chance. There is a reason those two still will be here, if they are, after TC as backup QBs. I am not sure what experienced backup out there can even string two wins together for cowboys?

Jerry and BP have said several times year, even in midst of playoff run, they think they can game plan around Romo or Henson and win. Obviously Playoff will mean another thing, but you never know about a player till they are thrown into the fire.

 

[RCowboyFan]

If Carver could drive that other team's bus to the playoffs, I think Romo (or even Henson) could take this team there if necessary.

You mean Carter? Yeah, BP has said that himself, that he thinks Romo and Henson are more talented than Carter and believes he can win with them. Jerry specifically said, just like they did with carter, they can carter the game to Romo or Henson if they were to start.

 

[DLCassidy]

I do agree that there are examples of young QBs coming in and playing well. Favre did it with Majikowski (sp?), Roath did it in Pittsburgh, Everybody knows the Brady story. System and circumstances have so much to do with success of QBs in the NFL. I agree that patients are important but I will tell you that I do not believe in developing two young QBs at the same time. I think that it is time we make a decision on Romo and Henson. One or the other IMO. We need an experienced back up QB. If Bledsoe goes down, for a period of 4 to 5 games, in our division, we would be done. All teams are two close right now. If we lost Bledsoe for the season, we would probably finish the string but if the injury were a few games, an experienced back up could mean the difference in making the playoffs and going home. JMO.

It really doesn't matter anyway what any of us think on this issue- not that it can't be discussed. But Romo/Henson is what we're going with end of story. And for 2-3 games it would be ok. 4-5 games? Odds are against all but a few teams surviving their starting QB going down that long. But Bledsoe is a rock anyway. Worrying about him getting hurt is like wearing a belt in case your suspenders fail- possible but unlikely. I'm a lot more worried about injuries to the OL- those are much bigger risks and we're still not in great shape if they do.

 

[Alexander]

If Bledsoe were to go down, would BP be on the phone to VT that evening?

Are you trying to be cruel?

 

[DLCassidy]

Answering Cassidy:

(1) a few: Johnny Unitas; Kurt Warner; Bart Starr; Trent Green . . .

...Tony Romo...:laugh1:

(2) No problem. Parcells and Ireland know what they are doing, even if Jerry Jones doesn't. Bellicheck knew enough about Brady that he didn't think it was necessary to bring in a so-so veteran quarterback to disrupt Brady's progress during training camp. His patience paid off. Parcells' will, too, I expect.

Well said.

 

[TNCowboy]

i know jeff mroz is a rookie but i hear good things about him,he is from my area and guys at my gym know him and say he is very talented.

The guys at my gym say he's terrible......

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Or Romo/Henson could prove to be Simms/Brady when given the chance. There is a reason those two still will be here, if they are, after TC as backup QBs. I am not sure what experienced backup out there can even string two wins together for cowboys?

Jerry and BP have said several times year, even in midst of playoff run, they think they can game plan around Romo or Henson and win. Obviously Playoff will mean another thing, but you never know about a player till they are thrown into the fire.

To me, the real problem with both Henson and Romo are what happens after two games? In todays NFL, DCs get game film on a QB for two games and they basically have enough data to develope a defensive game plan that will create problems. Not saying that Romo or Henson do not have skills but it's tough for an inexperienced QB to deal with the adjustments that have to be made against a talented and motivated defensive unit. It all comes down to seeing it before. This, more then anything else, is why I believe it's a good idea to have an experienced back up.

 

[Doomsday101]

To me, the real problem with both Henson and Romo are what happens after two games? In todays NFL, DCs get game film on a QB for two games and they basically have enough data to develope a defensive game plan that will create problems. Not saying that Romo or Henson do not have skills but it's tough for an inexperienced QB to deal with the adjustments that have to be made against a talented and motivated defensive unit. It all comes down to seeing it before. This, more then anything else, is why I believe it's a good idea to have an experienced back up.

You hope we can put together a good rushing attack and a steller defense and not put all the pressue on the QB.

 

[RCowboyFan]

To me, the real problem with both Henson and Romo are what happens after two games? In todays NFL, DCs get game film on a QB for two games and they basically have enough data to develope a defensive game plan that will create problems. Not saying that Romo or Henson do not have skills but it's tough for an inexperienced QB to deal with the adjustments that have to be made against a talented and motivated defensive unit. It all comes down to seeing it before. This, more then anything else, is why I believe it's a good idea to have an experienced back up.

Yeah, but you can't play ifs and buts all life. You can have all the talent in world, but if you are never given the chance no one will ever know.

Who the heck knew Brady was going to be that good or who knew of Kurt Warner? Or who knew Jake Delhomme would turn up to be such a good FA QB?

Now if Romo or Henson were first year QBs, I would say I would be worried too. Not that I am totally worry free right now, but I think concern is bit overblown. Probably because I guess many cowboys think Cowboys have good SB chance, but if these guys are going to be future of Cowboys, they have to be tested sometime.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It really doesn't matter anyway what any of us think on this issue- not that it can't be discussed. But Romo/Henson is what we're going with end of story. And for 2-3 games it would be ok. 4-5 games? Odds are against all but a few teams surviving their starting QB going down that long. But Bledsoe is a rock anyway. Worrying about him getting hurt is like wearing a belt in case your suspenders fail- possible but unlikely. I'm a lot more worried about injuries to the OL- those are much bigger risks and we're still not in great shape if they do.

I agree that it doesn't matter what anybody thinks except BP. Having said that, I am not so certain that Romo and Henson are what were going with. BP says things but if you look at him, he always kinda comes back home to his roots. His roots, in this case (at least according to Parcells himself) is the 3 year rule. Show me something. This is something that BP has taken from Landry and has used throughout his career. He also leans heavily towards tried and true Vets. It just seems odd that if we were good enough to do something in the playoffs, BP would allow two unexperienced backups to anchor at the 2 spot. Historically, Bledsoe has been very durable. On the other hand, it takes one unlucky moment. At some point, you have to believe that the law of averages catches even the fleetest runner. How long can his luck last? Heck, we've gone for 4 straight seasons with no injuries to the starting QB. Two years with Quincy, one with Vinnie and one with Bledsoe. How long can it continue? I don't know. It just seems a prudent move IMO. Hypothetically, if we went into the Thanks Giving day game 8-2 or 7-3 and managed to sustain injury to Bledsoe, it would be horrible to end up losing 4 of the last six or even 3 for 3. In our division, one game will make the difference. I just have a real hard time believing that if BP believe we have a team, he would be OK with our current QB situation. JMO of course and we all know who's opinion counts.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You hope we can put together a good rushing attack and a steller defense and not put all the pressue on the QB.

As you know Dooms, I am a big big believer in a strong running game, ball control offense and a kick arse defense but I also believe that good teams and good coaching staffs can game plan a team who is difficiant in any area. I fear that if we don't have an answer at our back up QB, that can be turned against us when it counts.

 

[RCowboyFan]

As you know Dooms, I am a big big believer in a strong running game, ball control offense and a kick arse defense but I also believe that good teams and good coaching staffs can game plan a team who is difficiant in any area. I fear that if we don't have an answer at our back up QB, that can be turned against us when it counts.

I think the problem is you haven't thought about who is out there in FA, lets say can save Cowboys or win for Cowboys in a playoff game? Right now no one. So not sure you can answer there in FA.

Current backups and anyone in FA are as much of question marks. Heck I fear, relying on Bledsoe that much itself is a risk, considering his recent history in key games. So basically, even in Bledsoe's case, its a 50/50 proposition anyway, i.e. he has come up big in some games and some games he has failed. So key again is OL/D/Running game and hope that TO effect is really good on WRs/TE. With that, Bledsoe might flourish and same with current young ones.

You just have to trust what BP and Jerry say, when they say they are comfortable with their QBs. I personally seen enough, from both college and recent NFLE that Henson can do the job. I am also not too discouraged about Romo as limited as he might be in some cases, that he might not be able to do the job if required. Either case, if injury happens in Playoffs, I guess it will be done and over.

Now if someone like Brian Griese is available, I would think, that would be a good option. Not someone like Kerry Collins.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah, but you can't play ifs and buts all life. You can have all the talent in world, but if you are never given the chance no one will ever know.

Who the heck knew Brady was going to be that good or who knew of Kurt Warner? Or who knew Jake Delhomme would turn up to be such a good FA QB?

Now if Romo or Henson were first year QBs, I would say I would be worried too. Not that I am totally worry free right now, but I think concern is bit overblown. Probably because I guess many cowboys think Cowboys have good SB chance, but if these guys are going to be future of Cowboys, they have to be tested sometime.

There coaching staffs knew is the simple answer here. Having said that, your example here applies if your looking at one inexperienced QB. It doesn't fly with two. Why would you do this with two? I guess I just don't believe in developing two young QBs. You evaluate young QBs, then you invest in the guy who is the best fit. To me, developing two only draws out the development cycle.

In the end, you hope for the best but you plan for the worst. That, IMO, is what needs to happen for our organization IMO.

 

[Doomsday101]

As you know Dooms, I am a big big believer in a strong running game, ball control offense and a kick arse defense but I also believe that good teams and good coaching staffs can game plan a team who is difficiant in any area. I fear that if we don't have an answer at our back up QB, that can be turned against us when it counts.

If we can put together a team who can run and a defense that can shut people down then yes I think the young guys can do the job.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think the problem is you haven't thought about who is out there in FA, lets say can save Cowboys or win for Cowboys in a playoff game? Right now no one. So not sure you can answer there in FA.

Current backups and anyone in FA are as much of question marks. Heck I fear, relying on Bledsoe that much itself is a risk, considering his recent history in key games. So basically, even in Bledsoe's case, its a 50/50 proposition anyway, i.e. he has come up big in some games and some games he has failed. So key again is OL/D/Running game and hope that TO effect is really good on WRs/TE. With that, Bledsoe might flourish and same with current young ones.

You just have to trust what BP and Jerry say, when they say they are comfortable with their QBs. I personally seen enough, from both college and recent NFLE that Henson can do the job. I am also not too discouraged about Romo as limited as he might be in some cases, that he might not be able to do the job if required. Either case, if injury happens in Playoffs, I guess it will be done and over.

Now if someone like Brian Griese is available, I would think, that would be a good option. Not someone like Kerry Collins.

I don't think that's the problem at all. This is not really about who is there, per say. It's more a phylisophical question. I do not believe that there are no QBs out there that can't do the job. I mean, if you brought a guy in mid season, then yeah. However, if you brought a guy in who had experience early, there's no reason they can't learn the offense. Even an average QB with experinece, IMO, would be a better fit for us then a QB who had no game experience at all. I mean, if we say that were building a team that can go lean on a strong defense and superior running game to help us through with Romo/Henson as the backup, how then can we not say that if we had an experienced Vet s the number two, these same principles would not be an even bigger asset in favor of that stratigy?

 

[DLCassidy]

I agree that it doesn't matter what anybody thinks except BP. Having said that, I am not so certain that Romo and Henson are what were going with. BP says things but if you look at him, he always kinda comes back home to his roots. His roots, in this case (at least according to Parcells himself) is the 3 year rule. Show me something. This is something that BP has taken from Landry and has used throughout his career. He also leans heavily towards tried and true Vets. It just seems odd that if we were good enough to do something in the playoffs, BP would allow two unexperienced backups to anchor at the 2 spot. Historically, Bledsoe has been very durable. On the other hand, it takes one unlucky moment. At some point, you have to believe that the law of averages catches even the fleetest runner. How long can his luck last? Heck, we've gone for 4 straight seasons with no injuries to the starting QB. Two years with Quincy, one with Vinnie and one with Bledsoe. How long can it continue? I don't know. It just seems a prudent move IMO. Hypothetically, if we went into the Thanks Giving day game 8-2 or 7-3 and managed to sustain injury to Bledsoe, it would be horrible to end up losing 4 of the last six or even 3 for 3. In our division, one game will make the difference. I just have a real hard time believing that if BP believe we have a team, he would be OK with our current QB situation. JMO of course and we all know who's opinion counts.

I can't see us dumping a Romo, a guy who is well versed in our system, for an overpriced and underwhelming Collins who doesn't want to back up anyway. After Collins what seasoned vet is out there that you think we can go over .500 with? A bunch of flotsam and jetsam IMO. No, I think BP is pretty happy with Romo and he hasn't given up on Henson yet either.

The staff's interest in our backups has a LOT more to do with which of our 2 guys is future starter material, not which can play a few games for Bledsoe if he gets hurt IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If we can put together a team who can run and a defense that can shut people down then yes I think the young guys can do the job.

Posted this in my previous but I go back to the idioligy that it is not a good idea to develop two young QBs. One is OK. Two slows progress IMO. Again, if you have a good defense and running game, how is that not going to work better in a situation where you have an average talented QB with good NFL experience as opposed to two young QBs who have no experience. In a situation where you have a great running game and defense, the thing that kills you is mistakes. Turnovers are the biggest disadvantage to winning games in that manner. It would seem to me that the experienced QB is going to be the better fit in that game plan. In that situation, you just need a QB who can execute the simple offense. Not the QB who may have more talent but has never seen the field IMO.

 

[Alexander]

If we can put together a team who can run and a defense that can shut people down then yes I think the young guys can do the job.

Not just run, but run well enough to control the clock and play tight defense.

It won Baltimore and before them, Chicago some Super Bowls. Dilfer, Steve Fuller and Jim McMahon were hardly top shelf talents. They simply had to execute the basics and not make mistakes.

 

[Doomsday101]

Posted this in my previous but I go back to the idioligy that it is not a good idea to develop two young QBs. One is OK. Two slows progress IMO. Again, if you have a good defense and running game, how is that not going to work better in a situation where you have an average talented QB with good NFL experience as opposed to two young QBs who have no experience. In a situation where you have a great running game and defense, the thing that kills you is mistakes. Turnovers are the biggest disadvantage to winning games in that manner. It would seem to me that the experienced QB is going to be the better fit in that game plan. In that situation, you just need a QB who can execute the simple offense. Not the QB who may have more talent but has never seen the field IMO.

I agree with what your saying but I don't see a vet out there that is worth bringing in while we are in the process of developing young QB's. I also agree that your better off working with just 1 but that is not the case and I would hate to see Dallas ditch Romo or Henson for a washout like Collins, they may have a future Collins does not. Now Bill could have a change of heart if he does not see enough progress out of Henson or Romo this training camp. We will just have to wait and see.

 

[JackMagist]

As it stands now it looks like Romo will be the backup. If Bledsoe goes down we will get to see what Romo has on the field. If Romo goes down we will get another chance to see what Henson has on the field. This could change in TC and Henson could overtake Romo for the #2 job but then again he might not. I think we need to get used to the idea that Romo and Henson are locks for this year.

If we lose two of our current guys we will go out and get one of the gimps left on the FA market (Vinny anyone?). But we will not be going after any of the crap left out there unless something drastic happens. And even then I would hope that the emergency FA pickup would never see the field and our #3 guy would hold the starting job.