What's Our Window?

[rcaldw]

Romo's playing well down the stretch because he and his targets are healthy. That's it. That's the difference. This is the exact same Romo as every other year, otherwise.

The reason why you get so much grief (and will continue to) is that you were anti-Romo in the face of overwhelming evidence that he was one of the best in the league (and one of the best to ever play the game).

No one cares about people that were negative about Romo before 2006 or even 2007. But those rare few that were too stubborn/ignorant to recognize his skills in 2007, 2008, and 2009 will forever have a tainted "reputation."

lol....ok If you can't see Romo's performance is better too, then you aren't watching very closely. He had to pick up his game too, and he has. And in terms of reputation, Thegot, with all due respect, I've seen you be wrong and stubborn plenty of times. I don't think you are the reputation dispenser. One example is my negative comments/doubting about Romo in "2009". Can you find some of those for me please? If I said he had something to prove in big games, he did, and he has, enough said. And I wasn't alone in those sentiments. some of the best NFL players ever to play the game said the same. Do they have tainted reputations too?

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

This is always a difficult one to answer, but I thought it would be interesting to get some of your opinions on this.

What made me think about this was the possibility that someone mentioned of us winning 1 playoff game and then being done. Would we be satisfied? They asked. Someone else said we would be right back at 2007.

So, here is my question for you. How many years does this current core of players have to get a Super Bowl accomplished? If we just get 1 playoff win this year, does that window argue for keeping Wade and trying not to blow it up too much? Or, does that window argue for trying to get someone else (assuming that scenario), and getting to the big game while there is time?

I think we are a fairly young team at most positions, so that may argue for a larger window, though Romo turns 30 next season.

Your opinion?

With this current core? I'd say up to 5 years because of the youth this roster possesses. The o-line is the only unit as a whole that are 30+ and that position historically plays well into the mid 30s. I consider Tony a "young 30" because of his on-field experience so getting another 5-8 years outta him isn't out of the question. And if the f/o can add to the core with good drafts over the next couple of years, the window can stay propped open even longer!!

 

[burmafrd]

Romo is definitly more under control and aware of the need to hold onto the football this year. A decided change there.

This team has been a solid playoff contending team talent wise since 2005.
The fact that it has missed the playoffs in 2005, 2008 are clear failures, though 2005 was more understandable. Last year was not forgiveable.

Wade does NOT have the power BP had and anyone who thinks so is blind deaf and dumb. However, his apparent lack of Ego means that Jerruh is more comfortable with him then any coach he has ever had. Which means that Jerruh is more likely to listen and go along with Wade. Wade is not a great HC, or even a very good one. He is a good HC who seems to have found the sweet spot- like a system QB in the right system. And he does know players.

Our window will indeed last as long as Romo does IF we keep the O line capeable. The Steelers found out this year what happens when you ignore problems in the O line that were clear last year. We need better depth and to start getting young players in now so that in 2-3 years they can start replacing aging starters. That is why I think we MUST get a LT high in the draft this year and keep bringing in developmental players, at least 2 per season.

 

[aikemirv]

Romo is definitly more under control and aware of the need to hold onto the football this year. A decided change there.

This team has been a solid playoff contending team talent wise since 2005.
The fact that it has missed the playoffs in 2005, 2008 are clear failures, though 2005 was more understandable. Last year was not forgiveable.

Wade does NOT have the power BP had and anyone who thinks so is blind deaf and dumb. However, his apparent lack of Ego means that Jerruh is more comfortable with him then any coach he has ever had. Which means that Jerruh is more likely to listen and go along with Wade. Wade is not a great HC, or even a very good one. He is a good HC who seems to have found the sweet spot- like a system QB in the right system. And he does know players.

Our window will indeed last as long as Romo does IF we keep the O line capeable. The Steelers found out this year what happens when you ignore problems in the O line that were clear last year. We need better depth and to start getting young players in now so that in 2-3 years they can start replacing aging starters. That is why I think we MUST get a LT high in the draft this year and keep bringing in developmental players, at least 2 per season.

I guess you mean high in late 1st round or second, but at that point I think you get the top G in the draft not the remaining LT. That would be the equivalent of what you have in Free IMO.

 

[soccerbud]

i think you guys need to factor into the salary cap as well. In 4-5 years, most of the core players now would be within the last year (or few years of their contracts), and they will eat up a significant portion of the cap.

I think that will hinder the cowboy's ability to spend and stay competitive. Unless we draft really well year in and year out, therefore, we will be able to replace older players with young, cheap players rather than expensive free agents.

 

[The Realist]

This year, we need to replace/upgrade: LT, ILB, FS, WR

Next year, we need to replace/upgrade: LG, CB, RT

Year 3, we need to replace/upgrade: SS, ILB, C, RG

The changes won't be wholesale, but we need to start filling in the gaps and replacing aging players with younger, more productive ones.

I don't disagree with your entire post.

Some of those replacements may already be on the roster.

LT - Free

LG - Brewster (unless you believe he is the future RT).

ILB - I don't see us addressing anything here. James is a good player and has a bit of leadership. Brookings is flat out the heart and soul of this team. Carpenter is finally making a contribution and JW as the highest ceiling of anyone on the team. Hodges was a big time playmaker at TCU. Worst case scenario Hodges is a Keith Davis type ST player. Who you cutting?

 

[superpunk]

To follow up, though SP, I think even you would have to admit that Romo has had his best season this season, in terms of playing his best in the must win games. I've really seen a new stage in his development. No?

I don't think it's a significant enough improvement where it would be enough to change my mind - if I had previously held a low opinion of him.

He's gotten better this year, for sure. But it's no night and day difference. He's pretty much the same as he's ever been. But THIS year, because our defense is playing so well, he does not have to take so many risks with the football. The rest of our team has raised their level of play, but most of us already knew what we were getting from Romo on a game to game basis. And that's been the same for a few years now. Great.

I don't see where the 2006-2008 haters are justified in jumping off their hate ship to the Romo bandwagon. He hasn't gotten *that* much better. But public perception has certainly shifted now that he threw a few less picks in December.

 

[rcaldw]

I don't think it's a significant enough improvement where it would be enough to change my mind - if I had previously held a low opinion of him.

He's gotten better this year, for sure. But it's no night and day difference. He's pretty much the same as he's ever been. But THIS year, because our defense is playing so well, he does not have to take so many risks with the football. The rest of our team has raised their level of play, but most of us already knew what we were getting from Romo on a game to game basis. And that's been the same for a few years now. Great.

I don't see where the 2006-2008 haters are justified in jumping off their hate ship to the Romo bandwagon. He hasn't gotten *that* much better. But public perception has certainly shifted now that he threw a few less picks in December.

I think a part of my initial hesitancy, and why I am convinced about him now, has to do with something I believe about QB play, in general, in the current NFL.

I don't know how to explain it, entirely, but it seems to me that QB numbers are inflated across the league. I looked last night and we have at least 5 QB's (there may be more I didn't look), who have ratings over 100. That is unbelievable.

I don't know if it is explained by rules, by offensive and defensive philosophies, or what, but whatever the reason it has become more common to have QB ratings above 90.

So, when I look at any QB, not just Romo, I'm not blown away by stats, I look for some other things. Does he seem composed in big situations? Does his play elevate or take a step back in big games, pressure situations.

I'm not saying Tony played poorly in all the big games before this year, I can remember when he played really well. But I couldn't say (at least to the satisfaction of my own mind) that his play elevated either.

This year is different in my opinion. I don't just think Tony has played well this year in the big games, I think he has played his best football, and to my mind that is a big step forward.

I know I took a ribbing from some of you for saying this a few years ago, sounds kind of infantile to my ears too, but even when you say I was "hating" on Romo, I had his jersey in my closet. Meaning, I have always WANTED him to be what he has proven to be, but until I see evidence of it, I'm not an easy sell.

I have said before that I am an unapologetic pedigree guy when it comes to QB's. I still believe that over the long haul there won't be many undrafted free agents who turn into franchise guys. Tony is a very rare guy when it comes to that. Try to name a bunch of others. Johnny Unitas was a guy like that.

So, I DO see a difference this year.

 

[theogt]

lol....ok If you can't see Romo's performance is better too, then you aren't watching very closely. He had to pick up his game too, and he has. And in terms of reputation, Thegot, with all due respect, I've seen you be wrong and stubborn plenty of times. I don't think you are the reputation dispenser. One example is my negative comments/doubting about Romo in "2009". Can you find some of those for me please? If I said he had something to prove in big games, he did, and he has, enough said. And I wasn't alone in those sentiments. some of the best NFL players ever to play the game said the same. Do they have tainted reputations too?

I think his performance is slightly better in some areas, but no more than is expected from the gradual progression of a player gaining experience.

Statistically his performance this year (97 QB rating; 278 YPG) is actually down from or identical to 2007 (97.4 QB rating; 263 YPG) and the first games of 2008 (103.5 QB rating; 281 YPG) before he broke his hand.

 

[rcaldw]

As a follow up to my last post, and to demonstrate my point about QB stats.

This year there are 12 QB's with ratings over 90 in the NFL, 5 over 100.

In 1992 there were 2 QB's with ratings over 90 and 1 over 100.
1993, 3 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1994 2 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1995 8 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1996 2 QB's over 90, 0 over 100
1997 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1998 6 QB's over 90, 4 over 100
1999 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2000 7 QB's over 90, 2 over 100
2001 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2002 4 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2003 6 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2004 11 QB's over 90, 4 over 100
2005 8 QB's over 90, 2 over 100
2006 8 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2007 8 QB's over 90, 3 over 100
2008 9 QB's over 90, 1 over 100

Now, from 1992-2002 (10 years), there were 3 years where 6 or more QB's posted a rating in the 90's.

From 2003 to 2009 (7 years), EVERY year has had 6 or more, and 6 YEARS have had 8 or more.

How to explain this, exactly, I don't know, but the 90 QB rating means less today than it used to, (because you can go 11 or 12 deep into the league and still find it), and you have to look at other things IN ADDITION to evaluate QB play.

 

[rcaldw]

I think his performance is slightly better in some areas, but no more than is expected from the gradual progression of a player gaining experience.

Statistically his performance this year (97 QB rating; 278 YPG) is actually down from or identical to 2007 (97.4 QB rating; 263 YPG) and the first games of 2008 (103.5 QB rating; 281 YPG) before he broke his hand.

You might be right Theogt. Truthfully, I might have expected too much from him too soon, but I think we are all pleased right now.

 

[theogt]

As a follow up to my last post, and to demonstrate my point about QB stats.

This year there are 12 QB's with ratings over 90 in the NFL, 5 over 100.

In 1992 there were 2 QB's with ratings over 90 and 1 over 100.
1993, 3 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1994 2 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1995 8 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1996 2 QB's over 90, 0 over 100
1997 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
1998 6 QB's over 90, 4 over 100
1999 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2000 7 QB's over 90, 2 over 100
2001 5 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2002 4 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2003 6 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2004 11 QB's over 90, 4 over 100
2005 8 QB's over 90, 2 over 100
2006 8 QB's over 90, 1 over 100
2007 8 QB's over 90, 3 over 100
2008 9 QB's over 90, 1 over 100

Now, from 1992-2002 (10 years), there were 3 years where 6 or more QB's posted a rating in the 90's.

From 2003 to 2009 (7 years), EVERY year has had 6 or more, and 6 YEARS have had 8 or more.

How to explain this, exactly, I don't know, but the 90 QB rating means less today than it used to, (because you can go 11 or 12 deep into the league and still find it), and you have to look at other things IN ADDITION to evaluate QB play.

You can't logically use these statistics to devalue QB rating. This only means you cannot compare QB ratings across eras. QB rating has historically been, and is currently, the individual statistic with the highest correlation to winning percentage.

 

[rcaldw]

You can't logically use these statistics to devalue QB rating. This only means you cannot compare QB ratings across eras. QB rating has historically been, and is currently, the individual statistic with the highest correlation to winning percentage.

I don't deny what you are saying at all. What I'm saying is that the number "90" is not as significant as it used to be. You just have to look at where a guy finishes in comparison with other guys.

And (and I admit I may be in a minority on this one), but I still believe that where QB ratings are in the same ball park, there are "intangibles" that can't be figured into that QB rating that show up big time especially in the playoffs.

For example:

2009 - Tony ranks 9th in the league. I don't believe he is the 9th best QB in football right now, I put him in the top 5 this season, easy.

2008 - had him 8th

2007 - had him 5th

2006 - had him 5th

I would take the 2009 Tony Romo over any previous edition (that's just me), and yet his "league rank" is his lowest.