Tony Romo

[theogt]

If this doesn't make a case for the idiocy of the QB rating system then I don't know what does. Romo fumbled 4 times, lost 2 and couldn't get the score with 4 chances from inside the 10 at the end of the game..and we lost...but look at that QB rating!

You can say "but he fumbled four times" as many times as you'd like. I broke down each fumble earlier in the thread. Romo's positives in this game grossly outweighed his negatives.

Can you say that about the O-line?

How bout the defense? Secondary? Special teams?

 

[iceberg]

If this doesn't make a case for the idiocy of the QB rating system then I don't know what does. Romo fumbled 4 times, lost 2 and couldn't get the score with 4 chances from inside the 10 at the end of the game..and we lost...but look at that QB rating!

then maybe some other aspects of the team failed us. the qb rating rates the qb, not the team play.

last i checked the qb can't win it alone, yet now you're looking at the rating to be indicitive of the entire team.

 

[BigDFan5]

Saying someone else plaed worse does not excuse Romo for Bad play. I mean Ted Bundy killed more people than Charlie Manson, but I still think they are both bad people.

 

[Undisputed]

Saying someone else plaed worse does not excuse Romo for Bad play. I mean Ted Bundy killed more people than Charlie Manson, but I still think they are both bad people.

 

[theogt]

Saying someone else plaed worse does not excuse Romo for Bad play. I mean Ted Bundy killed more people than Charlie Manson, but I still think they are both bad people.

Horrible analogy. Did Manson or Bundy's total positive on society outweight their total negative? No.

Did Romo's total positive grossly outweigh is total negative today? Of course it did.

 

[Wrangler87]

romo lost us todays game, no excuses

People on this board are so easy to read.

 

[BigDFan5]

Horrible analogy. Did Manson or Bundy's total positive on society outweight their total negative? No.

Did Romo's total positive grossly outweigh is total negative today? Of course it did.

Today Romo's positive didnt outweigh the negative

1 fumble lost on the Lions 8 yardline on first down possible loss of 7 points

Defense gets a 3 and out and TNew returns a pnt for a TD

Dallas' next drive Romo INT on the Dallas 28 results 7 points for Lions

couple drives later fumble Lions get the ball on the Dallas 13 yard line


thats a pretty big swing in points there

 

[theogt]

Today Romo's positive didnt outweigh the negative

1 fumble lost on the Lions 8 yardline on first down possible loss of 7 points

Defense gets a 3 and out and TNew returns a pnt for a TD

Dallas' next drive Romo INT on the Dallas 28 results 7 points for Lions

couple drives later fumble Lions get the ball on the Dallas 13 yard line


thats a pretty big swing in points there

Let's look at the results of each fumble once again:

First Fumble - Sacked immediately because of pressure. Fumble recovered by Julius Jones. No harm, no foul. (Result - Zero points by Detroit).

Second Fumble - Arguably not a fumble. Recovered by Detroit who goes 3 and out. (Result - Zero points by Detroit).

Third Fumble - Net positive for Dallas. Romo recovers and makes an incredible play for the first down to keep Dallas alive in the game. (Result- First down for Dallas).

Fourth Fumble - Didn't see it because Sopcast sucks. (Result - 3 ponts for Detroit)

On the four drives in which he fumbled, one resulted in 3 points for Detroit and one resulted in 7 points for Dallas.

What is that? A net positive result on fumbles.

 

[BigDFan5]

Let's look at the results of each fumble once again:

First Fumble - Sacked immediately because of pressure. Fumble recovered by Julius Jones. No harm, no foul. (Result - Zero points by Detroit).

agreed

Second Fumble - Arguably not a fumble. Recovered by Detroit who goes 3 and out. (Result - Zero points by Detroit).

It was definately a fumble, and it happened on the Lions 8 yard line taking away a possible 7 points

Third Fumble - Net positive for Dallas. Romo recovers and makes an incredible play for the first down to keep Dallas alive in the game. (Result- First down for Dallas).

agreed

Fourth Fumble - Didn't see it because Sopcast sucks. (Result - 3 ponts for Detroit)

fumble happened on the dallas 13 result in 3 points

On the four drives in which he fumbled, one resulted in 3 points for Detroit and one resulted in 7 points for Dallas.

What is that? A net positive result on fumbles

you forgot one cost us 7 points (3 minimum)



add in the INT that led to a Lions TD and you have at least a 13 point swing

 

[iceberg]

look bigd - the game of "i'll say something good so you can counter with something bad" can only go on forever and no one gets anywhere.

i don't see anyone saying romo had a stellar day but it was a what, 111 qb rating?

no, that doesn't tell the whole story of the *game* - agreed.

but neither do the (4) fumbles like you're trying to make it seem.

 

[theogt]

On the second fumble, maybe it was -- maybe it wasn't (a fumble). There's no excuse for a player coming up from behind him on that play unblocked. You can't put a blindsided hit on a QB as a fault of the QB.

 

[BigDFan5]

look bigd - the game of "i'll say something good so you can counter with something bad" can only go on forever and no one gets anywhere.

i don't see anyone saying romo had a stellar day but it was a what, 111 qb rating?

no, that doesn't tell the whole story of the *game* - agreed.

but neither do the (4) fumbles like you're trying to make it seem.

I didnt say it told the whole story I said he deserved a share of blame along with the rest of the team.

Hey and I was PM'ed and ask to respond to his post!

 

[BigDFan5]

On the second fumble, maybe it was -- maybe it wasn't (a fumble). There's no excuse for a player coming up from behind him on that play unblocked. You can't put a blindsided hit on a QB as a fault of the QB.

the player that was "unblocked" had already been blocked out of the play. The only reason he made it to Romo was because he was running down the LOS trying to find a WR and held the ball to long

 

[iceberg]

yet anytime someone mentions something positive about romo, you're quick to counter with a fumble and it's potential costs.

 

[theogt]

I didnt say it told the whole story I said he deserved a share of blame along with the rest of the team.

Hey and I was PM'ed and ask to respond to his post!

Because it's nice to have a civilized discussion rather than trying to respond to people saying "Bench Romo" or resorting to name calling.

 

[theogt]

the player that was "unblocked" had already been blocked out of the play. The only reason he made it to Romo was because he was running down the LOS trying to find a WR and held the ball to long

Romo rolled out. I can't remember if it was a designed roll out or not. Once the passer leaves the pocket, the line doesn't just stop having blocking responsibility.

He was quite a distance from the sideline so it's not like he really held it too long.

 

[iceberg]

the player that was "unblocked" had already been blocked out of the play. The only reason he made it to Romo was because he was running down the LOS trying to find a WR and held the ball to long

this is one of those things that romo does that when it works for him, we "annoint him" and when it doesn't, we crucify him.

the truth is in the middle. learn when and where to do this and not do it all the time. that will come with experience and only experience.

romo will be fine in the long run and this one game does not define his career.

 

[dbair1967]

23/32, 321 Yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT

QB rating: 111.6

One 4th quarter drive to take the lead.

One 4th quarter drive to come up one yard short of tying.

If he makes that one extra yard, he is the hero of the game. But nooooo...he's the reason we lost. Some people are just plain ignorant.

like I said in another post, numbers can be deceiving sometimes

I am not down on him, no matter what his QB rating stat says, he didnt have a "good" game today...nobody else did either though

and he could have made one more yd and it might not have mattered, we'd have still needed a 2pt conversion just to tie the game...its not like a TD would have won it

the defense is the main reason we lost, however Romo is not Troy Aikman or Roger Staubach right now and to insinuate otherwise isnt right either

David

 

[BigDFan5]

yet anytime someone mentions something positive about romo, you're quick to counter with a fumble and it's potential costs.

I rolled my eyes at the "positive" TO threads too because I see no positives in losing. His QB rating looked great and 321 yards was great too, but because those numbers looked great does that mean he is not to be given even a shred of blame for todays loss?

 

[BigDFan5]

Because it's nice to have a civilized discussion rather than trying to respond to people saying "Bench Romo" or resorting to name calling.

I agree which is why I like debating you and Ice because neither of you resort to that no matter what the subject