Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The Romo Question
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15, 16  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Desperado82


Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 25680
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
Dboys88-82 wrote:
Romo is what again? 1-6? 1-7 in win or go home games.


What was he in those games leading up to the final game of the season? If not for his performances in those games we wouldn't even have been in position to have a chance whatsoever to make the playoffs.

Just sayin'


And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


Believe me, I'm all for us finding a better QB moving forward. However, we could do a lot worse than Romo. I think if we add a few pieces to the OL this off-season and Murray can stay healthy, it'd greatly benefit Romo and take more of the pressure off of him - thus helping the team as a whole.
_________________

^^^mack
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23322
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


I agree 100% on who he is like. Which is why I expect him to lose us some, and win us some. It's the Gun Slinger in him. The era of football I started off watching was with Gun Slingers, I think I will always prefer those.

Also, Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing GD.... Laughing Laughing Laughing
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20000
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


I agree 100% on who he is like. Which is why I expect him to lose us some, and win us some. It's the Gun Slinger in him. The era of football I started off watching was with Gun Slingers, I think I will always prefer those.

Also, Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing GD.... Laughing Laughing Laughing


I think I've made my opinion well known that I hate gunslinging QBs. They can't be trusted. And when you're talking about the most important position of any sport, you can't have a guy who consistently needs to be protected from himself because he lacks the mental acuity to get the job done. If you can't consistently make smart decisions rather than having your brain hiccup and give you a case of the yips, I don't want you on my team.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23322
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I get what you are saying, but there is something about the Magic that watching just transforms the game. As a fan of the sport, Gunslingers are iconic. I will never forget the Monday Night game after his father passed away. Wow. I guess itís because I am a traditionalist in the sense that when I coach I believe in 3 yards and a cloud of dust that when I can see someone so electric, so transformational alter the very dynamics of the game that I find it to be inspirational.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20000
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I get what you are saying, but there is something about the Magic that watching just transforms the game. As a fan of the sport, Gunslingers are iconic. I will never forget the Monday Night game after his father passed away. Wow. I guess itís because I am a traditionalist in the sense that when I coach I believe in 3 yards and a cloud of dust that when I can see someone so electric, so transformational alter the very dynamics of the game that I find it to be inspirational.


I don't care about inspiration. I care about winning.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 43025
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I hate the "winners" stat. So was (is) Vince Young, Tim Tebow, and Sanchez. It really works both ways.


I don't like that stat either, just like I don't like the QBR "stat" or that 4th quarter comeback "stat". None of them have a ton of merit due to the other variables which surround them and determine them.

For example, if a QB throws three INTs in his first 4 passes which leads to his team being down 17-0 in the first quarter, but he then goes 36-42 for 355 yards and 3 TDs for the rest of the game, his QBR will look really good, even if/when the team loses because he placed the team behind the 8 ball so early in the game. It will also make his "4th Quarter Comeback" numbers look good because he has to throw the ball for the entire game. But, if he goes 15-30 for 155 yards and 1 TD for the game with 4 passes thrown in the 4th quarter, his QBR will be terrible, his 4th Quarter Comeback "stat" will be terrible (and irrelevant), but his team would likely be winning the game.

I guess what I'm saying is that those stats have little merit if the team is always playing from behind and if the QB is responsible for placing the team in the position where it is playing from behind. Turnovers are deciding factors in games, much moreso than a QBR. So I don't care what the stat sheet says. I care about how the guy played for the entire game and whether the team won. And if the QB places a defense in a bad position throughout the course of a game - as Romo has a tendency of doing - the trade value for that player will be dramatically diminished because teams won't trust him.


In the first scenario, his "4th Qtr CB" stat would only look good if his team won - his QBR would also be 93.3

In the second scenario his "4th Qtr CB" stat would also only look good if they were losing going into the 4th quarter and then won - and the likelyhood of a team winning with their QB completing 50% of his passes for 5 YPA and only 1 TD in this era seems unlikely.

In essence you're telling me you would rather have Mark Sanchez than Tony Romo

You also act as if Romo is the king of turnovers... yet you likely hold Eli Manning in high regard. Romo is a year removed from a 10 INT season where he put up a phenomenal 3:1 TD:INT ratio. Tony has never had a 20 INT season while Eli has had 2. Romo's career INT% is 2.8, compared to Eli's 3.2

So is it really that you hate QB's who turn the ball over and put their team in a bad spot, or that you just hate Romo?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matts4313


Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 35347
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Most fans hate romo because his team never pulls out the win when he he having an off day, unlike manning.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PincheJimmy


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 1212
Location: Flower Mound, TX
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
Dboys88-82 wrote:
Romo is what again? 1-6? 1-7 in win or go home games.


What was he in those games leading up to the final game of the season? If not for his performances in those games we wouldn't even have been in position to have a chance whatsoever to make the playoffs.

Just sayin'


And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


So who would you take, Alex Smith or Tony Romo? Either way, your looking for a new QB by year 3 or 4
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20000
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I hate the "winners" stat. So was (is) Vince Young, Tim Tebow, and Sanchez. It really works both ways.


I don't like that stat either, just like I don't like the QBR "stat" or that 4th quarter comeback "stat". None of them have a ton of merit due to the other variables which surround them and determine them.

For example, if a QB throws three INTs in his first 4 passes which leads to his team being down 17-0 in the first quarter, but he then goes 36-42 for 355 yards and 3 TDs for the rest of the game, his QBR will look really good, even if/when the team loses because he placed the team behind the 8 ball so early in the game. It will also make his "4th Quarter Comeback" numbers look good because he has to throw the ball for the entire game. But, if he goes 15-30 for 155 yards and 1 TD for the game with 4 passes thrown in the 4th quarter, his QBR will be terrible, his 4th Quarter Comeback "stat" will be terrible (and irrelevant), but his team would likely be winning the game.

I guess what I'm saying is that those stats have little merit if the team is always playing from behind and if the QB is responsible for placing the team in the position where it is playing from behind. Turnovers are deciding factors in games, much moreso than a QBR. So I don't care what the stat sheet says. I care about how the guy played for the entire game and whether the team won. And if the QB places a defense in a bad position throughout the course of a game - as Romo has a tendency of doing - the trade value for that player will be dramatically diminished because teams won't trust him.


In the first scenario, his "4th Qtr CB" stat would only look good if his team won - his QBR would also be 93.3

In the second scenario his "4th Qtr CB" stat would also only look good if they were losing going into the 4th quarter and then won - and the likelyhood of a team winning with their QB completing 50% of his passes for 5 YPA and only 1 TD in this era seems unlikely.

In essence you're telling me you would rather have Mark Sanchez than Tony Romo

You also act as if Romo is the king of turnovers... yet you likely hold Eli Manning in high regard. Romo is a year removed from a 10 INT season where he put up a phenomenal 3:1 TD:INT ratio. Tony has never had a 20 INT season while Eli has had 2. Romo's career INT% is 2.8, compared to Eli's 3.2

So is it really that you hate QB's who turn the ball over and put their team in a bad spot, or that you just hate Romo?


MH, I love it when I say that you shouldn't use worthless stats only to have you fall right back on them. It's blatantly laughable.

I also find sad yet truly entertaining that you get so defensive about Romo that you immediately start ramming words down a person's throat. Where did I ever mention wanting Mark Sanchez or say that Eli Manning wasn't a turnover machine? Did I ever make those statements? You need to stop hanging on Romo's junk and loosen up here. He is a turnover machine. He is a choke artist, but that doesn't mean that I made any assertion as to who I would want instead of him because that's not the topic of conversation. So stop inserting red herrings into the discussion and move on.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20000
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PincheJimmy wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
Dboys88-82 wrote:
Romo is what again? 1-6? 1-7 in win or go home games.


What was he in those games leading up to the final game of the season? If not for his performances in those games we wouldn't even have been in position to have a chance whatsoever to make the playoffs.

Just sayin'


And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


So who would you take, Alex Smith or Tony Romo? Either way, your looking for a new QB by year 3 or 4


I never made a statement as to who I would prefer because that's not the issue. I just want a QB who won't consistently place his team in a position where it has to come from behind nearly every game, won't turn the ball over, and won't choke in crunch time. If that guy is Alex Smith (not likely), then so be it. But why limit it to one particular person rather than the entire QB field of available players? Wouldn't that make more sense?
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20000
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matts4313 wrote:
Most fans hate romo because his team never pulls out the win when he he having an off day, unlike manning.


He's done it once: The Monday Night, 5 INT game against Buffalo.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 43025
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
MaddHatter wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I hate the "winners" stat. So was (is) Vince Young, Tim Tebow, and Sanchez. It really works both ways.


I don't like that stat either, just like I don't like the QBR "stat" or that 4th quarter comeback "stat". None of them have a ton of merit due to the other variables which surround them and determine them.

For example, if a QB throws three INTs in his first 4 passes which leads to his team being down 17-0 in the first quarter, but he then goes 36-42 for 355 yards and 3 TDs for the rest of the game, his QBR will look really good, even if/when the team loses because he placed the team behind the 8 ball so early in the game. It will also make his "4th Quarter Comeback" numbers look good because he has to throw the ball for the entire game. But, if he goes 15-30 for 155 yards and 1 TD for the game with 4 passes thrown in the 4th quarter, his QBR will be terrible, his 4th Quarter Comeback "stat" will be terrible (and irrelevant), but his team would likely be winning the game.

I guess what I'm saying is that those stats have little merit if the team is always playing from behind and if the QB is responsible for placing the team in the position where it is playing from behind. Turnovers are deciding factors in games, much moreso than a QBR. So I don't care what the stat sheet says. I care about how the guy played for the entire game and whether the team won. And if the QB places a defense in a bad position throughout the course of a game - as Romo has a tendency of doing - the trade value for that player will be dramatically diminished because teams won't trust him.


In the first scenario, his "4th Qtr CB" stat would only look good if his team won - his QBR would also be 93.3

In the second scenario his "4th Qtr CB" stat would also only look good if they were losing going into the 4th quarter and then won - and the likelyhood of a team winning with their QB completing 50% of his passes for 5 YPA and only 1 TD in this era seems unlikely.

In essence you're telling me you would rather have Mark Sanchez than Tony Romo

You also act as if Romo is the king of turnovers... yet you likely hold Eli Manning in high regard. Romo is a year removed from a 10 INT season where he put up a phenomenal 3:1 TD:INT ratio. Tony has never had a 20 INT season while Eli has had 2. Romo's career INT% is 2.8, compared to Eli's 3.2

So is it really that you hate QB's who turn the ball over and put their team in a bad spot, or that you just hate Romo?


MH, I love it when I say that you shouldn't use worthless stats only to have you fall right back on them. It's blatantly laughable.

I also find sad yet truly entertaining that you get so defensive about Romo that you immediately start ramming words down a person's throat. Where did I ever mention wanting Mark Sanchez or say that Eli Manning wasn't a turnover machine? Did I ever make those statements? You need to stop hanging on Romo's junk and loosen up here. He is a turnover machine. He is a choke artist, but that doesn't mean that I made any assertion as to who I would want instead of him because that's not the topic of conversation. So stop inserting red herrings into the discussion and move on.


Oh crap I have no rebuttle... divert!! Divert!!

Thats all your piost said.

You call him a turnover machine then ignore stats that prove otherwise
You pretend to know what a 4th qtr cb stat is then completely butcher it
You say you dont care anout stats then say you care about how the guy played the entire game which is what stats measure

Hust admit it ... you hate Romo and will do anything to justify your hate
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PincheJimmy


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 1212
Location: Flower Mound, TX
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
PincheJimmy wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Desperado82 wrote:
Dboys88-82 wrote:
Romo is what again? 1-6? 1-7 in win or go home games.


What was he in those games leading up to the final game of the season? If not for his performances in those games we wouldn't even have been in position to have a chance whatsoever to make the playoffs.

Just sayin'


And he's also the primary reason why we lose those games. What people need to accept is that Romo has the Brett Favre syndrome. Yes, he places us in positions to win. But he's also the primary catalyst for us losing. There is no middle ground with him. He either plays really well or fails miserably. The problem is that his meltdowns are not only legendarily catastrophic, but come at the most inopportune times: in win-or-go-home games. I'd rather have a QB who puts up modest numbers but comes through in the clutch rather than a guy who puts up great numbers but consistently finds (and invents) ways to lose every time you place him in key situations.


So who would you take, Alex Smith or Tony Romo? Either way, your looking for a new QB by year 3 or 4


I never made a statement as to who I would prefer because that's not the issue. I just want a QB who won't consistently place his team in a position where it has to come from behind nearly every game, won't turn the ball over, and won't choke in crunch time. If that guy is Alex Smith (not likely), then so be it. But why limit it to one particular person rather than the entire QB field of available players? Wouldn't that make more sense?


Smith was just an example I used with Slamman as we were discussing Romo's trade value
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 12995
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think most of you know that I'm not a Romo hater. But, at his age and this point in his career, there is no longer any way to justify Romo's performance in "win and advance" games. Here's what I think is comical... When Romo's subpar performances are brought up in "win and advance" games, Romo defenders universally turn to regular season stats or argue that it was a team defeat despite Romo's valiant efforts. The Seattle game? Team loss? Not so much. But okay, I'll give romo the benefit of the doubt. The giants game? Okay, he played poorly in 4th quarter but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. The eagles game in 08? It's getting harder to give him the benefit of the doubt but okay. The Minnesota game? Not so much anymore. The second giants game in 2011? That's almost all on Romo. The redskins game? That's all Romo.

Joe Flacco for the past 2 years has done something that Romo has never been able to do... Elevate his game when it matters most. That's what made Elway and Aikman HOFers. If Eli gets into HOF, it's not based on his regular season play.

Here's a simple question that if answered honestly answers the "Romo Question." At this point in Romo's career, In a "win and advance game" do you expect him to play great and lead cowboys to victory OR do you expect his play to to be a chief contributor to another cowboys loss?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
htfryar


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 9773
Location: Hot Springs, Arkansas
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Flacco, Elway and Eli never played behind an o-line as pathetic as ours. Aikman played behind some of the best o-lines in league history. Comparing Romo's situation to those guys is asinine.
_________________


Homer Simpson wrote:
Beer, the cause of, and solution to all of lifeís problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15, 16  Next
Page 14 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group