What is Tony Romo?

[Verdict]

"What is Tony Romo?" I think this is one of the largest looming questions for the Cowboys. It is probably more important than whether Bill Parcells or Terrell Owens stays next year.

The Cowboys need a true "franchise" QB in the worst way. If Romo is the answer, then we should compete for the SB for the next several years. If not, well, we had better have a plan "B", or we will be no better than mediocre, even with a great defense (assuming it is capable of becoming great).

I think we have to look at signing Romo to a longer term deal at a time when he is struggling (like right now). If he is the greatest thing since sliced bread, then we save some huge cap dollars. If he doesn't pan out, then you have a guy who can at least spot start, which we know he is capable of doing.

The Cowboys' brass can make a few bad decisions and still be ok, but this is not one of them. They really need to get this one right.

 

[Bleu Star]

"What is Tony Romo?" I think this is one of the largest looming questions for the Cowboys. It is probably more important than whether Bill Parcells or Terrell Owens stays next year.

The Cowboys need a true "franchise" QB in the worst way. If Romo is the answer, then we should compete for the SB for the next several years. If not, well, we had better have a plan "B", or we will be no better than mediocre, even with a great defense (assuming it is capable of becoming great).

I think we have to look at signing Romo to a longer term deal at a time when he is struggling (like right now). If he is the greatest thing since sliced bread, then we save some huge cap dollars. If he doesn't pan out, then you have a guy who can at least spot start, which we know he is capable of doing.

The Cowboys' brass can make a few bad decisions and still be ok, but this is not one of them. They really need to get this one right.

I am in full agreement that now would be the perfect time to approach him about a fair long term deal. That's just business tactics. This is the perfect time.

 

[DragonCowboy]

I think Romo will be a good one for a long time.

Parcells is putting too much on Romo's plate right now, making him throw the long ball everytime he falls behind. Romo, IMO, isn't ready for that yet.

However, Romo had a good game yesterday. He owned some of the rushers, it was crazy. If his receivers didn't drop so many balls, this game would've been ours.

 

[tyke1doe]

I don't know if the game would have been ours.

The Eagles pass rush was too fierce and our defense couldn't stop granny's head cold.

But Romo is the real deal.

Again, he scans the field well, and I don't know too many elite quarterbacks who would be great given the pass rush he faced yesterday. (example, Peyton Manning.)

Sign him to a lucrative long-term deal.

 

[Wrangler87]

"What is Tony Romo?" I think this is one of the largest looming questions for the Cowboys. It is probably more important than whether Bill Parcells or Terrell Owens stays next year.

The Cowboys need a true "franchise" QB in the worst way. If Romo is the answer, then we should compete for the SB for the next several years. If not, well, we had better have a plan "B", or we will be no better than mediocre, even with a great defense (assuming it is capable of becoming great).

I think we have to look at signing Romo to a longer term deal at a time when he is struggling (like right now). If he is the greatest thing since sliced bread, then we save some huge cap dollars. If he doesn't pan out, then you have a guy who can at least spot start, which we know he is capable of doing.

The Cowboys' brass can make a few bad decisions and still be ok, but this is not one of them. They really need to get this one right.

Yeah, not after his good game last week, or his great game next week.

What is Tony Romo? He is a typical young NFL QB. He has great games, good games, below average games, and a few bad games. Luckily for us, the positive outweigh the negative, especially for such a inexperienced QB.

I think we got a great future ahead of us.

 

[DragonCowboy]

I don't know if the game would have been ours.

The Eagles pass rush was too fierce and our defense couldn't stop granny's head cold.

But Romo is the real deal.

Again, he scans the field well, and I don't know too many elite quarterbacks who would be great given the pass rush he faced yesterday. (example, Peyton Manning.)

Sign him to a lucrative long-term deal.

Well, not just the drops, but also some of the playcalls.

For example:

We were down 16-7, and our defense was actually starting to stop the Eagles. We had the ball around the Eagle 40, Julius was running well, and Romo was hitting the short/middle passes. I don't understand what Parcells was thinking when he called that play. If they keep going the way they were going, they had atleast 3 pts there.

We were down 7-0, what kind of playcall is a SWEEP on 4th and goal at the 1? That was doomed from the start.

I really don't think we were as out of it as many people said. We were down by 6 at the end of the first half. We held the Eagles to 3 pts on their first drive, and then pretty much stopped them throughout the 3rd qtr.

We didn't keep our cool, we were only down by 9 in the 3rd, but Parcells had visions of the New Orleans game, and the game really seemed worse than the score showed. If the team kept its cool, we would've come back.

 

[Verdict]

What would be devastating is if Romo does not turn out to be serviceable and we do not have a plan "B". I think Bledsoe is done after this season, so we will have to bring someone in to fill his spot. We really need to bring in a QB that has immediate potential upside, just in case Romo doesn't pan out.

I think Romo is going to be very good, but we are going to be able to get a glimpse of what he is made of over the next two games. If he is the QB I hope he is, he will adjust and show that he is "the man", and our season will be extended.

 

[dougonthebench]

Jerry will make sure Romo stays a Cowboy for along time to come.

 

[DIAF]

I said weeks ago that the stretch of games beginning with the 2nd Giants game and running until yesterday's game would tell us what kind of QB Tony Romo was. 4 games against good teams, 2 of which are division rivals. Well, I'm sorry to say, but I don't think (and never really thought) that Tony Romo is or could be a franchise QB. I know he's only started not even part of one season, but he's been in the league for what, 3 or 4 years now. He didnt play all that well against NY, he sure as hell didnt play well vs. NO and looked like total DOGCRAP against Philly yesterday. I'm thinking that Romo is what he appears to be after that batch of games; a decent starting QB. I know I will be ripped to freaking shreds for this, people will say OH NO HES STILL LEARNING HE'S SO YOUNG and what have you, but I counter with this. He was undrafted. It took him 3 seasons to even get off the bottom of the depth chart. When he finally got a chance to play, he showed off what he had learned sitting on the bench studying all those years and came out of the gate hot but against the soft part of our schedule. When the games got tougher, when the games meant more, he wilted. I'd say that given all of that, evidence points to him being a decent QB, nothing more, nothing less. Which isn't to say that is bad; he's just not the FRANCHISE everyone here wanted him to be.

The only worry I really have now is if Tony Romo's performance before we hit the critical part of the schedule was a flash in the pan; which is entirely possible given his history being less than 10 games. But at least for next season, he played well enough this year to keep Jerry from drafting another QB but didn't demonstrate that he has the goods, franchise-wise. But you don't need a OMG FRANCHISE QB to win in the NFL. Although it would be nice.

 

[percyhoward]

If Owens doesn't drop the ball on that fly pattern in the 3rd quarter, Romo's stat line at the time (assuming Owens doesn't take it in for a TD) would have looked like this:
11 of 16 159 68.8% 121.6

The complexion of the game is changed, we see a lot of MBIII in the 4th quarter, Romo isn't forcing throws. That was a huge drop, which has to be taken into account in judging Romo's performance.

Notice how we hardly see any acrobatic catches anymore? That's Romo's accuracy.

 

[theogt]

If Owens doesn't drop the ball on that fly pattern in the 3rd quarter, Romo's stat line at the time (assuming Owens doesn't take it in for a TD) would have looked like this:
11 of 16 159 68.8% 121.6

The complexion of the game is changed, we see a lot of MBIII in the 4th quarter, Romo isn't forcing throws. That was a huge drop, which has to be taken into account in judging Romo's performance.

Notice how we hardly see any acrobatic catches anymore? That's Romo's accuracy.

Wow. Take two plays -- JUST TWO -- and change them. That drop by Owens and one of the the goalline plays in the first half. Talk about a different ball game.

 

[Wrangler87]

If Owens doesn't drop the ball on that fly pattern in the 3rd quarter, Romo's stat line at the time (assuming Owens doesn't take it in for a TD) would have looked like this:
11 of 16 159 68.8% 121.6

The complexion of the game is changed, we see a lot of MBIII in the 4th quarter, Romo isn't forcing throws. That was a huge drop, which has to be taken into account in judging Romo's performance.

Notice how we hardly see any acrobatic catches anymore? That's Romo's accuracy.

No doubt. Romo was playing really well most of the game. He tends to get a bit restless when they go a few drives without scoring. That really reminds me of Favre.

 

[PBJTime]

How about the bad snap that he chased, picked up, and calmy picked threw for 6-7 yards. Or the many blitzers he had to evade or just plain shed their tackles. He can only do so much. The supporting cast HAS to help out. The kid has it, of that I have no doubt.

 

[DragonCowboy]

How about the bad snap that he chased, picked up, and calmy picked threw for 6-7 yards. Or the many blitzers he had to evade or just plain shed their tackles. He can only do so much. The supporting cast HAS to help out. The kid has it, of that I have no doubt.

Yeah. Sadly, right after that, there were two consecutive false starts.

As you said, there's only so much he can do before the rest of the team has to pitch in.

 

[Dcz84]

Wow. Take two plays -- JUST TWO -- and change them. That drop by Owens and one of the the goalline plays in the first half. Talk about a different ball game.

Glenn droped a 30 yard catch that puts the ball near mid field at the start of the 3rd qtr,and boy did tony take a lick on that play but stood in there and delivered a perfect pass, tack on 15 yard's for the late hit and were in scoring postion at the 35 of the eagles. It's the same thing every week 2-3 plays that just kill us.Hat's off to Bobby C he played pretty good yesterday, great recovery skill's on a couple play's, pretty fast too.

 

[DIAF]

Yeah. Sadly, right after that, there were two consecutive false starts.

As you said, there's only so much he can do before the rest of the team has to pitch in.

We can start next year with the OL. And by getting rid of JJ.

 

[windward]

I said weeks ago that the stretch of games beginning with the 2nd Giants game and running until yesterday's game would tell us what kind of QB Tony Romo was. 4 games against good teams, 2 of which are division rivals. Well, I'm sorry to say, but I don't think (and never really thought) that Tony Romo is or could be a franchise QB. I know he's only started not even part of one season, but he's been in the league for what, 3 or 4 years now. He didnt play all that well against NY, he sure as hell didnt play well vs. NO and looked like total DOGCRAP against Philly yesterday. I'm thinking that Romo is what he appears to be after that batch of games; a decent starting QB. I know I will be ripped to freaking shreds for this, people will say OH NO HES STILL LEARNING HE'S SO YOUNG and what have you, but I counter with this. He was undrafted. It took him 3 seasons to even get off the bottom of the depth chart. When he finally got a chance to play, he showed off what he had learned sitting on the bench studying all those years and came out of the gate hot but against the soft part of our schedule. When the games got tougher, when the games meant more, he wilted. I'd say that given all of that, evidence points to him being a decent QB, nothing more, nothing less. Which isn't to say that is bad; he's just not the FRANCHISE everyone here wanted him to be.

The only worry I really have now is if Tony Romo's performance before we hit the critical part of the schedule was a flash in the pan; which is entirely possible given his history being less than 10 games. But at least for next season, he played well enough this year to keep Jerry from drafting another QB but didn't demonstrate that he has the goods, franchise-wise. But you don't need a OMG FRANCHISE QB to win in the NFL. Although it would be nice.

He didn't play that bad against Philly un til the fourth quarter when he was trying to bring the team back and forcing things. Young quarterbacks struggle at this every now and then. Blaming Romo for the losses against New Orleans and Philly is misguided.

 

[windward]

We can start next year with the OL. And by getting rid of JJ.

The only OL we need to get rid of is Rivera, maybe Adams.

Julius will be back. Hopefully with better coaching

 

[DIAF]

He didn't play that bad against Philly un til the fourth quarter when he was trying to bring the team back and forcing things. Young quarterbacks struggle at this every now and then. Blaming Romo for the losses against New Orleans and Philly is misguided.

Once again, the Romo patrol goes on the offensive.

Please tell me where I blamed the NO and Philly losses ON Your Lord God Thou Shall Have No Other Gods Before Me Romo? I said he didn't play well.

Last i checked, teams lose football games. Not players.

 

[dboyz]

Once again we have a few predicting bad things for Mr. Romo. I will go on record again that to predict that those predicting Romo's demise will end up looking very silly.