What Romo can do better than Bledsoe

[Vintage]

Hilarious....

I was thrilled with that third and 13 to Witten. That was a fantastic play. he bought time, moved around, and made a great throw that wasn't going to get Witten killed. That was great. I should really focus on those throws, and hope the others kind of go away. I just have doubts.

I know. I have my doubts too. But with Bledsoe, we are .500 with the inability to beat good/mediocre teams.

With Romo, we have an unknown. He might be the answer. Or we might need to draft a QB next year.

But whats the point in going .500 with a QB who is old, makes mistakes, and is not a long term solution?

 

[Stautner]

Which then makes any discussion about what he does better than Bledsoe purely speculative as well, doesn't it? Unless we're carrying that out from what little we've seen, while glossing over the bad.

Your logic is lacking.

Expressing an opinion about what Romo does better than Bledsoe doesn't mean the poster doesn't think Romo has failings. But that's not the topic - the topic is only about Romo's plusses. The same poster may have plenty to say if the topic were about Romo's failings.,

As for it all being speculation, who says fans can't or shouldn't speculate - that's what fans do. Besides, some things, like mobility, aren't speculative at all. No rational person would argue that Bledsoe is as mobile as Romo.

 

[Doomsday101]

I know. I have my doubts too. But with Bledsoe, we are .500 with the inability to beat good/mediocre teams.

With Romo, we have an unknown. He might be the answer. Or we might need to draft a QB next year.

But whats the point in going .500 with a QB who is old, makes mistakes, and is not a long term solution?

I think we draft a QB next year even if Romo show himself to be a good QB. I would not be suprised to see both a vet brought in as a backup and a rookie QB brought in to learn.

 

[Stautner]

I think we draft a QB next year even if Romo show himself to be a good QB. I would not be suprised to see both a vet brought in as a backup and a rookie QB brought in to learn.

That would seem to be a rational approach by the team, with the level of Romo's success determining just how high a pick we use on a QB.

 

[Established1971]

Man, I hate these posts. "I know he is better because?" So tell me does romo have 44,000 yards passing? Does he have 251 career TD's.... I think NOT!!!


Romo is green. He will not be better then Bledsoe for years to come. He is a better fit for our sub par O-line because he can run like hell that is all

what does Bledsoes past have anything to do with who is better for next Sunday?

 

[superpunk]

Your logic is lacking.

Expressing an opinion about what Romo does better than Bledsoe doesn't mean the poster doesn't think Romo has failings. But that's not the topic - the topic is only about Romo's plusses. The same poster may have plenty to say if the topic were about Romo's failings.,

As for it all being speculation, who says fans can't or shouldn't speculate - that's what fans do. Besides, some things, like mobility, aren't speculative at all. No rational person would argue that Bledsoe is as mobile as Romo.

Your understanding is lacking. I was responding to the idea that we "don't know if Romo is more prone to turnovers than Bledsoe. One half of football doesn't give us plenty of sample size to make such determination." with that quote. Don't take it out of context and try to go wild on it, cuz I'm not interested.

The OP was stating Romo did things better than Bledsoe that he has not actually shown, and as much is acknowledged in that post. If he wants to do that, potential failings are fair game, too.

 

[Vintage]

Man, I hate these posts. "I know he is better because?" So tell me does romo have 44,000 yards passing? Does he have 251 career TD's.... I think NOT!!!


Romo is green. He will not be better then Bledsoe for years to come. He is a better fit for our sub par O-line because he can run like hell that is all

Does Peyton?

Because even if Peyton doesn't, I take Peyton over Drew.

Does Brady? I'd take Brady there as well.

Does Carson? I'd take Carson....

 

[Vintage]

Your understanding is lacking. I was responding to the idea that we "don't know if Romo is more prone to turnovers than Bledsoe. One half of football doesn't give us plenty of sample size to make such determination." with that quote. Don't take it out of context and try to go wild on it, cuz I'm not interested.

The OP was stating Romo did things better than Bledsoe that he has not actually shown, and as much is acknowledged in that post. If he wants to do that, potential failings are fair game, too.

Taking my post out of context.

All I said was that we cannot say Romo is more turnover prone based on one half of football. You extapolated on that.

The only thing I said you could determine from that half was athletic ability (Drew vs Tony)

 

[jazzcat22]

Man, I hate these posts. "I know he is better because?" So tell me does romo have 44,000 yards passing? Does he have 251 career TD's.... I think NOT!!!


Romo is green. He will not be better then Bledsoe for years to come. He is a better fit for our sub par O-line because he can run like hell that is all

And with this OL he will be doing a lot of that. He will lead the NFL in SCRAMBLING YARDS.

To me the main difference between Tony & Drew....statues don't run....

 

[CowboyBlog]

And with this OL he will be doing a lot of that. He will lead the NFL in SCRAMBLING YARDS.

To me the main difference between Tony & Drew....statues don't run....

Last I remembered, statues dont have 14 years experience reading and anticipating the disguised defensives that will no doubt keep Jesus Romo out of the hall of fame this year.

 

[Funxva]

I've never shown you either, but I promise you that I'm a great NFL QB. Just give a few years to start with high paid veterans all around me and then you and the coaches can make the decision.

Be sure and afford me the same chance you are affording Romo because I have absolutely zero NFL experience also and at this time, we have the same record.

I'm sure Cowboy fans will disregard my sacks and interceptions because I can get out of the pocket now and then and throw passes. Like Romo, my decisions won't always be correct, but all the disgruntled bandwaggon fans will be happy because I will make them very fast.

I appreciate the opportunity.

Oh my God. That was amesome.

 

[Stautner]

Your understanding is lacking. I was responding to the idea that we "don't know if Romo is more prone to turnovers than Bledsoe. One half of football doesn't give us plenty of sample size to make such determination." with that quote. Don't take it out of context and try to go wild on it, cuz I'm not interested.

The OP was stating Romo did things better than Bledsoe that he has not actually shown, and as much is acknowledged in that post. If he wants to do that, potential failings are fair game, too.

First, my point about a lack of logic dealt with your comment not being able to speculate about Romo's strong points without "glossing over the bad". Obviously logic dictates that it IS possible to talk about someone's strong points and still recognize their weaknesses.

Second, you may have been responding to a discussion about turnovers, but your words were that it makes "ANY discussion of what he does better than Bledsoe purely speculative" - that comment was NOT limited to turnovers.

Third, go back and read the intial post. He DID NOT say that Romo hadn't shown those things ever, he said he didn't really show them IN THIS (Monday's) GAME. While preseason isn't the same as regular season, that doesn't change the fact that Monday was not the only time we have ever seen Romo play.

 

[cowboyed]

Man, I hate these posts. "I know he is better because?" So tell me does romo have 44,000 yards passing? Does he have 251 career TD's.... I think NOT!!!


Romo is green. He will not be better then Bledsoe for years to come. He is a better fit for our sub par O-line because he can run like hell that is all

I think mobility is icing on the cake. But don't typecast Romo on quick twitch muscles alone. He happens to have a sharp mind. He reads defense quickly and effectively. And he has an above average arm and very accurate, including while he is on the run. Emotionally he is tough. Bad plays roll off his back, he doesn't seem to savor his good ones.

This offense will be playing at a faster pace with more go to options. Win or lose, the Carolina game will be an eye opener. He will be better prepared to play against the Panthers than the Giants, that is for sure.

 

[superpunk]

First, my point about a lack of logic dealt with your comment not being able to speculate about Romo's strong points without "glossing over the bad". Obviously it IS possible to talk about someone's strong points and still recognize their weaknesses.

Could you be more wrong? I know it's a small thing, but substituting "while" (which is what I actually said) with "without" completely changes the meaning of that statement. Like I said - I'm not interested.

 

[Funxva]

First, my point about a lack of logic dealt with your comment not being able to speculate about Romo's strong points without "glossing over the bad". Obviously logic dictates that it IS possible to talk about someone's strong points and still recognize their weaknesses.

Second, you may have been responding to a discussion about turnovers, but your words were that it makes "ANY discussion of what he does better than Bledsoe purely speculative" - that comment was NOT limited to turnovers.

Third, go back and read the intial post. He DID NOT say that Romo hadn't shown those things ever, he said he didn't really show them IN THIS (Monday's) GAME. While preseason isn't the same as regular season, that doesn't change the fact that Monday was not the only time we have ever seen Romo play.

Bro, this is a football forum, not Jeopardy.. Please stop going all Alex Trebek with every post for those of us with less brain capacity to read big words.

kGR8THX

 

[Funxva]

I think mobility is icing on the cake. But don't typecast Romo on quick twitch muscles alone. He happens to have a sharp mind. He reads defense quickly and effectively. And he has an above average arm and very accurate, including while he is on the run. Emotionally he is tough. Bad plays roll off his back, he doesn't seem to savor his good ones.

This offense will be playing at a faster pace with more go to options. Win or lose, the Carolina game will be an eye opener. He will be better prepared to play against the Panthers than the Giants, that is for sure.

I agree with what you said about emotional toughness. I wonder if he approaches playing this the same way as he does a bad play in golf. Gotta have a short memory in golf most definitely.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

ROMO cannot pat the ball as good......

 

[Stautner]

Could you be more wrong? I know it's a small thing, but substituting "while" (which is what I actually said) with "without" completely changes the meaning of that statement. Like I said - I'm not interested.

HERE'S WHAT YOU SAID:

Which then makes any discussion about what he does better than Bledsoe purely speculative as well, doesn't it? Unless we're carrying that out from what little we've seen, while glossing over the bad.

The word "while" means we have to do both - judge by limited opportunities to see Romo AND ("while") glossing over the bad - you link them together.

Guess what, saying Romo is more mobile than Bledsoe is not speculative nor does it gloss over the bad.

See, you CAN comment on the positive without glossing over the negative.

The fact was, and still is, that no one was glossing over the bad, they were merely stating what they think Romo does better than Bledsoe - WHICH WAS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD.

It's poor comprehension of the subject to conlude that if someone says they like a certain trait in Romo that they are saying that Romo has no bad traits or are minimizing the bad traits. Good traits and bad traits are separate issues.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

I think we draft a QB next year even if Romo show himself to be a good QB. I would not be suprised to see both a vet brought in as a backup and a rookie QB brought in to learn.

Assuming you are talking about a Day 1 Pick....if not, just ignore the below:

That is an intesting take. If we are talking about today...right now, the only way I could conclude that is maybe the angle that Jerry Jones man not be comfortable with him and the angle that Parcells may not be here next year.

But besides, that I dont know about thinking that way until Romo flops horribly this year.

I really do think at this point Romo's play will dictate whether or not a QB is brought in.

- Mike G.

 

[Stautner]

Assuming you are talking about a Day 1 Pick....if not, just ignore the below:

That is an intesting take. If we are talking about today...right now, the only way I could conclude that is maybe the angle that Jerry Jones man not be comfortable with him and the angle that Parcells may not be here next year.

But besides, that I dont know about thinking that way until Romo flops horribly this year.

I really do think at this point Romo's play will dictate whether or not a QB is brought in.

- Mike G.

Someone will have to be brought in because Bledsoe wont be here, but you are right about Romo's play being a factor. If he plays well then a veteran backup will be fine as insurance, if not we need to draft someone who can be a long term solution.