Insurance.
It is really just that simple.
In the daily attempts to bash him and stir up crap I felt a little on the side of sanity and truth was in order.
2007 is meant to be a year we make a run at the Super Bowl. We're going to be attmepting this with a largely unproven commodity at QB. During his hot stretch last year, no one on the planet was better than Tony Romo. But teams figured out ways to slow him down and even stop him and he came back out of the clouds a bit.
That doesn't mean he doesn't still have some tremendous potential. When you combine charisma (leadership), confidence, and talent with a work ethic (Phillips says he is a daily film student at VR), the potential exists for great things.
Football is a violent game. We all know that. We've been extremely lucky in Dallas for a long time about QB injuries. In 2006, Bledsoe was benched or he could have started all 16 games presumably. He did just that in 2005. IN 2004, Vinny started 15 games and played in all 16, so we know he could have started all 16. In 2003 Quincy Carter started all 16, and he presumabely could have started all 16 in 2002 if he had not been benched.
Translation, you have to go all the way back to 2001 when injuries have sidelined a QB in Dallas. I think only 2 other teams can say this, Indianapolis and Green Bay. Fortune has smiled on us, but providence has a way of turning. If I am wrong on the 2 other teams, meaning if there are more teams who have not had QB injuries, please let me know.
This is why Brad Johnson makes the most sense. I openly admit, he was not my choice. I would prefer to go younger. The problem with that theory is younger is also unproven.
Of the QBs who have been on the market in the 2007 off season, Brad Johnson is easily the most proven candidate. The lone exception might be Drew Bledsoe, but that was never truly an option here I believe.
If Tony Romo goes down for a game or two, Brad Johnson is a perfect choice to keep a hopeful season from derailing. A veteran with a Super Bowl ring will provide the team with some confidence until Romo gets back in the saddle. An unproven commodity would potentially be a let down. We can't afford that.
Sometimes accepting a situation only requires that you step away from it and look at it through other eyes. In this case I am trying to look at it from the eyes of a General Manager who believes his team is close and risks need to be minimized.
I still want to draft a QB in round 3 or later to groom for the future. I don't ever want another multi year search for Aikman's successor. In this case, Romo's eventual successor. If Romo plays for many more years and his backups develop we also benefit from potential trades for draft picks. I'll even go as far as saying if the right guy is our 3rd string QB and Romo is lost early for the entire year I'd like to get that player some playing time. I harped on that for 4 years undeer Tuna's watch. Not about to sing a different tune now.
I'd ask you for your thoughts but I know if you feel like sharing you will, and if you don't you won't.
