Tony Romo’s not the same quarterback he used to be

Makes me feel great for drafting Romo with my first fantasy pick, and got laughed at by many.

I could've had Calvin Johnson, but went with Romo, then got Moss in the 2nd round.

Could be a great duo for me.
 
You guys mean to tell me that we haven't won a post season game since beating Minnesota in 1996?

That means we haven't won in... lets see, (1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) TWELVE YEARS!

:mad:
 
zrinkill;2906349 said:
10-26-2007-7-55-57-PM-7064416.jpg
:laugh2: WIN
 
Temo;2906308 said:
Here's the truth: Romo hasn't changed. The media's coverage of him has.

exactly.

the media loves him until we lose a big game then its because he went to play golf one day too many.

i have agreed with matt mosely about once in the past 2 years but yesterday on GAC he had it right. tony romo wasn't bad before and he isn't bad now. he didn't make any remarkable transformation other than continuing to work on areas of weakness which he has done EVERY year he has been in the NFL.

gallowaste-- well he holds the ball with two hands now...

uhh, yea, he worked on that this off-season as a focus but come game time he'll still take some chances and he'll still produce. if the team is healthy they'll shut a lot of people up but the story will go that it was the big personal changes... when in reality it will be the change in health and schedule that matter most. This isn't the 1992 Cowboy who could handle injuries and only lost games they wanted to lose or when Emmitt was holding out.
 
HoleInTheRoof;2906545 said:
You guys mean to tell me that we haven't won a post season game since beating Minnesota in 1996?

That means we haven't won in... lets see, (1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) TWELVE YEARS!

:mad:

If we had won a single playoff game.. i.e. against Seattle... does that really make it all better?

The team had to get re-built following the dynasty and it has. It will hopefully be good enough to win a lot more than one playoff game every few years as if that is the standard by which we should we judged.

The 2007 Super Bowl teams haven't won a playoff game since that Super Bowl. 5 teams won a playoff game in 2008. It's not like a lot of teams win playoff games.
 
jterrell;2906568 said:
If we had won a single playoff game.. i.e. against Seattle... does that really make it all better?

The team had to get re-built following the dynasty and it has
. It will hopefully be good enough to win a lot more than one playoff game every few years as if that is the standard by which we should we judged.

The 2007 Super Bowl teams haven't won a playoff game since that Super Bowl. 5 teams won a playoff game in 2008. It's not like a lot of teams win playoff games.

Great freaking post.

:bow:
 
CowboyWay;2906280 said:
I've never felt the need to touch myself after reading a sports article. Until now.

LOL!

Doomsday101;2906442 said:
Last post season game we won was against Minn. in 1996

I got the feeling he was being quite sarcastic. Maybe it was just me.

jterrell;2906568 said:
If we had won a single playoff game.. i.e. against Seattle... does that really make it all better?

The team had to get re-built following the dynasty and it has. It will hopefully be good enough to win a lot more than one playoff game every few years as if that is the standard by which we should we judged.

The 2007 Super Bowl teams haven't won a playoff game since that Super Bowl. 5 teams won a playoff game in 2008. It's not like a lot of teams win playoff games.

Valid points. Great post.
 
CowboyWay;2906280 said:
I've never felt the need to touch myself after reading a sports article. Until now.

Quite possibly the funniest post i have read since joining this board. Maybe its just my screwed up sense of humor. \

Excellent play sir!!:bow: :bow:
 
Idgit;2906348 said:
It's really awesome to see how much better he's gotten this season.

wow, didn't realize we played a meaningful snap yet.
 
zrinkill;2906641 said:
You will find another excuse when we have.

um, no.

after a few actual games if there is change i'll be quite happy to post that observation. and i'll hope it continues into january.

otoh you can judge based on newspaper articles, quotes, hope & meaningless preseason football.
 
zrinkill;2906641 said:
You will find another excuse when we have.

This message is hidden because chinch is on your ignore list.

I guess there is still no reason to take him off of my ignore list. The only one to ever make it.
 
Romo has stopped trying to be Brady has helped... that Brady thing was stupid, be yourself, or at least look at the OLines b4 doing stuff like that!
 
Romo admits he needed to change

Posted by Mike Florio on August 27, 2009 4:19 PM ET

Our theory, to date, regarding Tony Romo is that he already has achieved far more than any undrafted slappy ever could have dreamed possible, and so he became complacent regarding his career as the starting quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys -- and smitten with the Hollywood lifestyle that goes along with it. (As Taco Bill's latest item points out, that Hollywood lifestyle might get him smitten in different ways.)

In our view, Romo settled for a big-money contract that didn't fully reflect his market value because, even though the deal resided at the low end of the top-tier quarterback market, it represented far more money than Romo ever expected to pocket when he was trying to stay afloat on the bottom of the Dallas roster.

We also think that his "just happy to be here" mindset has kept him from becoming the kind of leader that his teammates need. And it's obvious that he hasn't been a good leader; if he were, the Cowboys wouldn't have needed to cut receiver Terrell Owens in order to give Romo a chance to blossom.

A good leader would have found a way to manage Owens and any other narcissistic, passive-aggressive, malcontented *sshole on the roster. Though they don't get much worse than T.O., he's not the first narcissistic, passive-aggressive, malcontented *sshole who has donned a football helmet. (After all, I once wore one.)

But Romo apparently is changing. Or, at a minimum, he's trying to change.

"Obviously the way I was before wasn't getting the job done to the extent to the goal you want to accomplish," Romo says, per the Associated Press. "So you just keep going and keep going and hopefully you are able to accomplish that one day. I can see improvement."

Romo also seems to admit that, indeed, he had grown too satisfied with his accomplishments in the NFL, and he wasn't pushing for more.

"Either you are trying to get better or you are content as a player," Romo said. "I am not content. I don't think this team is. We are striving to be a team that we hope can make everybody excited or have an exciting time watching us play this season."

It all sounds good on paper. It remains to be seen whether Romo can pull it off.

The challenge will come from convincing the guys who have been part of the team that there's a new sheriff in town. To truly make his case, Romo needs to be ready to get in the face and/or up the rear end of anyone who isn't fully on board with what the Cowboys are trying to accomplish.
 
Romo recognizes he wasn't getting the job done. I'm glad he said it, because if anyone on this forum said it, he'd be blasted as a hopeless pessimist . . .
 
fgoodwin;2907682 said:
Romo admits he needed to change

Posted by Mike Florio on August 27, 2009 4:19 PM ET

Our theory, to date, regarding Tony Romo is that he already has achieved far more than any undrafted slappy ever could have dreamed possible, and so he became complacent regarding his career as the starting quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys -- and smitten with the Hollywood lifestyle that goes along with it. (As Taco Bill's latest item points out, that Hollywood lifestyle might get him smitten in different ways.)

In our view, Romo settled for a big-money contract that didn't fully reflect his market value because, even though the deal resided at the low end of the top-tier quarterback market, it represented far more money than Romo ever expected to pocket when he was trying to stay afloat on the bottom of the Dallas roster.

We also think that his "just happy to be here" mindset has kept him from becoming the kind of leader that his teammates need. And it's obvious that he hasn't been a good leader; if he were, the Cowboys wouldn't have needed to cut receiver Terrell Owens in order to give Romo a chance to blossom.

A good leader would have found a way to manage Owens and any other narcissistic, passive-aggressive, malcontented *sshole on the roster. Though they don't get much worse than T.O., he's not the first narcissistic, passive-aggressive, malcontented *sshole who has donned a football helmet. (After all, I once wore one.)

But Romo apparently is changing. Or, at a minimum, he's trying to change.

"Obviously the way I was before wasn't getting the job done to the extent to the goal you want to accomplish," Romo says, per the Associated Press. "So you just keep going and keep going and hopefully you are able to accomplish that one day. I can see improvement."

Romo also seems to admit that, indeed, he had grown too satisfied with his accomplishments in the NFL, and he wasn't pushing for more.

"Either you are trying to get better or you are content as a player," Romo said. "I am not content. I don't think this team is. We are striving to be a team that we hope can make everybody excited or have an exciting time watching us play this season."

It all sounds good on paper. It remains to be seen whether Romo can pull it off.

The challenge will come from convincing the guys who have been part of the team that there's a new sheriff in town. To truly make his case, Romo needs to be ready to get in the face and/or up the rear end of anyone who isn't fully on board with what the Cowboys are trying to accomplish.

Stopped reading at "Posted by Mike Florio."
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,585
Messages
14,546,866
Members
24,212
Latest member
JerryJonesSupporter
Back
Top