Thoughts on Romo? *Merge*

He has surprised me.

Every year I-AA produces several undersized QBs that put up phenomenal numbers. Even winning the Walter Payton award is hardly indicative of success at the level. People enjoy citing his college success as some sort of "proof" that it should be a given he will be good in the NFL. I can and have listed numerous I-AA QBs that have put up similar or even superior numbers and gone absolutely no where.

However, he may be the exception. He certainly looks like he is worth developing and I wouldn't think the world was ending if he was forced into action.

I still don't think Romo's development should preclude this team from looking at QBs in the next two drafts though.
 
junk said:
I still don't think Romo's development should preclude this team from looking at QBs in the next two drafts though.
Click to expand...

I am totally on board with you there.

I hope Romo can be the QB of the NEAR future. But if we're in position to get a good QB in the draft, we should do what we can to grab one. While we still have depth and small holes to fill, it's time to consider making a draft move for a QB. Getting a great QB takes mulitple shots and always bringing in more options.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
Lets say were playing a team other then the Vikings and it's for real. What are the chances we hold a good offense to 10 points while commiting 4 TOs to zero?
Click to expand...

Lets say he's throwing to Terry Glenn and Terrell owens instead of Sam Hurd and Jamaica Rector while we're at it.

Do you think Glenn would have missed that ball that Hurd did? Do you think Owens would have pulled up on a route like Crayton did?

This "lets say its for real" argument is completely illogical - it wasn't for real. It was 2 and 3rd stringers with no game planning and extremely limited blitzing. You can't just make a foregone conclusion that because a 5th string WR dropped a ball that the QB who threw it is no good, or somehow extrapolate that out into a regular season game. It makes no sense.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
I disagree with this Dooms. The game should have been over long before that. Why should it be put on a Rookie FA to win a game in OT when in truth, if we just don't make those Redzone INTs, we probably win it with a FG?
Click to expand...
We should have won it twice with a FG regardless.

I think that's a lot to ask of Hurd and I'd also say that Hurd was the single player in OT that gave us a chance to win it. I just think it's a bit much to say it's Hurd as opposed to Romo. I do believe he has a chance to be a pretty good QB but that lose was on Romo 1st and Vanderfarright 2nd.
Click to expand...

A kicker misses two chip shots and somehow that is the fault of the QB that twice drove him into range to make the attempts?
 
wileedog said:
Lets say he's throwing to Terry Glenn and Terrell owens instead of Sam Hurd and Jamaica Rector while we're at it.

Do you think Glenn would have missed that ball that Hurd did? Do you think Owens would have pulled up on a route like Crayton did?

This "lets say its for real" argument is completely illogical - it wasn't for real. It was 2 and 3rd stringers with no game planning and extremely limited blitzing. You can't just make a foregone conclusion that because a 5th string WR dropped a ball that the QB who threw it is no good, or somehow extrapolate that out into a regular season game. It makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Lets say he is. If he's throwing off his back foot and making impulse decisions, the results are going to be the same. The fault there was not Rector of Crayton. Bottom line, you lose the turn over battle in the NFL and you lose 80% of the time. That's the deal. You don't have to like it but it's still the truth.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
Lets say he is. If he's throwing off his back foot and making impulse decisions, the results are going to be the same. The fault there was not Rector of Crayton. Bottom line, you lose the turn over battle in the NFL and you lose 80% of the time. That's the deal. You don't have to like it but it's still the truth.
Click to expand...

Fine. Romo made one turnover that was his fault in 45 pass attempts.

I'll take that from my QB anyday.
 
junk said:
I still don't think Romo's development should preclude this team from looking at QBs in the next two drafts though.
Click to expand...

If Dallas does not look at QBs next year in the draft, then that is indeed a bad move. Not saying they have to invest a first rounder in one at all, but you have to pull the trigger on the next developmental guy behind Romo.
 
wileedog said:
We should have won it twice with a FG regardless.



A kicker misses two chip shots and somehow that is the fault of the QB that twice drove him into range to make the attempts?
Click to expand...

We never should have been in OT to start with. Lets keep this in a real context here. Blame the lame kicker, that's fine. He should have made the kicks but lets also remember that the two INTs likely cost us attempts at FGs, at least, in regulation. We should never have had to be in a position to win it in OT.

The kicker missed the kicks but that does not excuse the poor INTs. Sorry.
 
wileedog said:
Fine. Romo made one turnover that was his fault in 45 pass attempts.

I'll take that from my QB anyday.
Click to expand...

No, Romo made two and besides that, he made at least three other impulse throws that could have gone bad.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
The kicker missed the kicks but that does not excuse the poor INTs. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Poor INT. Singular. Its not Romo's fault when he puts the ball where it is supposed to be and Crayton pulls up on the route.

One INT in 45 passes is well above the league standard. You are looking for reasons that just aren't there.
 
ABQCOWBOY said:
No, Romo made two and besides that, he made at least three other impulse throws that could have gone bad.
Click to expand...

Second one is on Crayton. Romo made the right read on the blitz and put the ball where it needed to be. What else do you want him to do, run out and catch his own pass?

And I'm not even going to get into pure speculation on "impulse throws"
 
wileedog said:
Poor INT. Singular. Its not Romo's fault when he puts the ball where it is supposed to be and Crayton pulls up on the route.

One INT in 45 passes is well above the league standard. You are looking for reasons that just aren't there.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with you.
 
wileedog said:
Second one is on Crayton. Romo made the right read on the blitz and put the ball where it needed to be. What else do you want him to do, run out and catch his own pass?

And I'm not even going to get into pure speculation on "impulse throws"
Click to expand...


I don't agree with you but I do appriciate the fact that your not going to get into "impule throws".

Thanks for that.
 
I think is he our future at QB but i think he is still way too green and needs another year or two before i would be comfy with him at starter. He has delusions of being brett favre and thats a dangerous thing. The two interceptions show it. And the kid slid a yard short of the first down which to me shows his field awareness is not where I would want it to be for a starter.
 
stealth said:
I think is he our future at QB but i think he is still way too green and needs another year or two before i would be comfy with him at starter. He has delusions of being brett favre and thats a dangerous thing. The two interceptions show it. And the kid slid a yard short of the first down which to me shows his field awareness is not where I would want it to be for a starter.
Click to expand...

2 ints but one was Crayton pulling up on the slant, WR can't stop on that play and Crayton did just that. 2nd Int was on Romo for throwing a deep pass with 2 defenders on the WR
 
Doomsday101 said:
2 ints but one was Crayton pulling up on the slant, WR can't stop on that play and Crayton did just that. 2nd Int was on Romo for throwing a deep pass with 2 defenders on the WR
Click to expand...


IIRC crayton stopped before the ball was even thrown so it's not all on him. i could be mistaken though, but if the reciever did in fact stop and then the ball was thrown in my mind the mistake was more romo than crayton
 
stealth said:
IIRC crayton stopped before the ball was even thrown so it's not all on him. i could be mistaken though, but if the reciever did in fact stop and then the ball was thrown in my mind the mistake was more romo than crayton
Click to expand...

You don't stop on a slant and Romo had already released it. Crayton saw a LB coming and flat stopped on the play and even Dallas WR coach got on him for that. That was not Romo fault.
 
To me looking at romo compared to bledso. I see a totally different style. He seems to evade the rush but also has the mentalitly that ever time he wants to make a pass. Even risky ones. Some are good some are bad.

So I see Romo as the style of Quincy carter, mcnabb with his ability to move, but I think the best comparisson is to Brett Farve. Brett was always making passes he shouldn't have been making and forcing plays. In the later years most of the plays he tried seemed to not work out. Romo so far has had more good gambles than bad ones, but he also wasn't always playing top talent.

So who would you compare Romo too. Romo just seems to have the drive to force every play and drive for something.
 
I'd compare him to a young Arnold Palmer. Similar swing but he isn't as good a putter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 130 more.
Total: 5,244 (members: 230, guests: 5,014)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,231
Messages
13,859,886
Members
23,788
Latest member
mattyice
Back
Top