Trade Romo?

Q_the_man;1280669 said:
What do yall think we can get for Romo, I think we can get a 1st....
:lmao2:

Yeah what's a few more years wandering around in the desert in the grand scheme of things? What's your backup plan? Bledsoe? Baker, God forbid?

IMO, it's an inapplicable post, given the state the position has been in for the last few years, but let's start throwing people under the bus before the playoffs are over.

Not.
 
bbgun;1282453 said:
Because maybe, just maybe there's someone out there they like more. Someone with better height or a stronger arm. Someone with better upside. Someone from a bigger program. Since they pick at #22, they won't have the dilemma of passing over a top QB prospect next April, meaning the job is Romo's for 2007. But I want to see a lot more from him before the idea of an extension is floated.

i don't think *you'll* ever see enough, bb. you see what you want to see and you go argue about it as if it's a jihad against your own windmills.

but for the sake of boredom - who would you pick if you let romo go for a mid-1st rounder? (just for the sake of argument)
 
iceberg;1282464 said:
i don't think *you'll* ever see enough, bb. you see what you want to see and you go argue about it as if it's a jihad against your own windmills.

but for the sake of boredom - who would you pick if you let romo go for a mid-1st rounder? (just for the sake of argument)

I'd pick someone taller, from a larger program, preferably one who had won SEC player of the year and led his team to a split national championship. But that's just me. All those things are incredibly important at the NFL level.
 
Any Rookie is a risk. And there is not one QB out there right now outside of Brady and Peyton and Palmer that really is a sure thing. Its beyond DUMB to trade Romo unless you can get someone PROVEN in the NFL to be at least GOOD.
 
burmafrd;1282467 said:
Any Rookie is a risk. And there is not one QB out there right now outside of Brady and Peyton and Palmer that really is a sure thing. Its beyond DUMB to trade Romo unless you can get someone PROVEN in the NFL to be at least GOOD.

that's the point most of us are trying to make to pelletboy, but he's hellbent that NO ONE is "untouchable".
 
iceberg;1282464 said:
i don't think *you'll* ever see enough, bb. you see what you want to see and you go argue about it as if it's a jihad against your own windmills.

You can disagree with me without impugning my intentions. I'm not a trollish bomb-thrower; I say what I believe.

but for the sake of boredom - who would you pick if you let romo go for a mid-1st rounder? (just for the sake of argument)

Not crazy about Brady or Russell from LSU, so this would not be an ideal time to trade him. Leftwich too one-dimensional and a sack waiting to happen. Vick's backup is a mystery. So we keep Tony till something better comes along, if ever.
 
bbgun;1282493 said:
So we keep Tony till something better comes along, if ever.

Whew ...... thats a relief .....

I have the Jersey on order .... ;)
 
iceberg;1282476 said:
that's the point most of us are trying to make to pelletboy, but he's hellbent that NO ONE is "untouchable".

And you agreed with me:

i'm not saying he's not untrade-able - BY ANY MEANS.

So what would you want for him? Quid pro quo.
 
bbgun;1282493 said:
You can disagree with me without impugning my intentions. I'm not a trollish bomb-thrower; I say what I believe.

Not crazy about Brady or Russell from LSU, so this would not be an ideal time to trade him. Leftwich too one-dimensional and a sack waiting to happen. Vick's backup is a mystery. So we keep Tony till something better comes along, if ever.

let me get this straight - you're not a trollish bomb thrower
you've argued what romo's trade value would be and called those who think tradinding isn't an option more or less blind lemmings, but when asked who you'd pick for qb, it's romo.

i'd ask what you'd consider a troll now but at this point my apathy just kicked in and i refuse to sink further into the depths of stupidity with you.
 
Has this thread seriously been 9 pages of what Romo is worth in trade?

Or has there been 3 pages of some side-tracked topic?
 
smarta5150;1282522 said:
Has this thread seriously been 9 pages of what Romo is worth in trade?

Or has there been 3 pages of some side-tracked topic?

Well I threw in an owens suckes but it didn't change a thing. I figured it was as useless as the main topic of said thread.;)
 
iceberg;1282517 said:
let me get this straight - you're not a trollish bomb thrower
you've argued what romo's trade value would be and called those who think tradinding isn't an option more or less blind lemmings, but when asked who you'd pick for qb, it's romo.

Um, how am I to know who's available? It's my fault this is a bad year for QBs in the draft? It's my fault Brees isn't a free agent this year?

i'd ask what you'd consider a troll now but at this point my apathy just kicked in and i refuse to sink further into the depths of stupidity with you.

More insults. Tony's been a pleasant surprise, but please try to keep a sense of perspective. He's not your brother or son.
 
Dave_in-NC;1282535 said:
Well I threw in an owens suckes but it didn't change a thing. I figured it was as useless as the main topic of said thread.;)

:bow:

Why are we talking about trading Romo anyway :laugh2:
 
bbgun;1282538 said:
Um, how am I to know who's available? It's my fault this is a bad year for QBs in the draft? It's my fault Brees isn't a free agent this year?

More insults. Tony's been a pleasant surprise, but please try to keep a sense of perspective. He's not your brother or son.

so, you have no idea what qb's are available and you're advocating trading romo? even "hypothetically?"

he is the best thing to come along for us in a decade and that alone makes trade talk just stupid when most teams would maim small ducks to have romo for their future qb.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
464,089
Messages
13,788,203
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top