So you say Romo isn't even close to being equal to past Cowboys QBs, all of which were on great TEAMS with all time great coaches including Aikman who is the most overrated QB south of Joe Namath. Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid.
<< <i>So you say Romo isn't even close to being equal to past Cowboys QBs, all of which were on great TEAMS with all time great coaches including Aikman who is the most overrated QB south of Joe Namath. Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid. >>
Exactly, he posted an article which I conveniently helped out and showed how well he's played and all he does is plug his ears like a child and stomp his feet. The only number he can possibly grasp is 'playoff wins', and, as with most entitled, spoiled brat franchises, thinks that playoff wins are a given. Anyone who doesn't reach that rare air is somehow a bum. The very idea he puts Danny friggin White ahead of Romo shows the full display of this guys inability to understand the team game of football.
>>>Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid. <<<
unwoundsage - you are the stupid one here. The stats that count clearly show Romo last behind Roger, Troy and Danny.
To call Aikman overrated is the MOST STUPID statement I have ever heard!!!!
I think it's time for you to concede at least a few things:
1. Romo is a great NFL QB. His record over the past 8 seasons backs it up.
2. The loss to Den. is NOT on Romo. You can't ignore what happened in the first 58 or so minutes of the game. Pretty much any QB besides Romo, and the Cowboys would have lost in a blowout- there would not have been any clutch situation.
3. It is just nonsense to judge a QB soley on his ability to win games. Football is far too much of a team sport for that. Let me make a baseball comparison. If a pitcher goes 12-18 with a 2.50 ERA, you'd probably say he had a terrible season. He only won 2/5 of his decisions. I'd say he had a great season. The pitcher's only job is to keep the other team from scoring. It was probably terrible run support, which is beyond a pitcher's control, that caused the 12-18 record. Just the same, a QB has no control over the play of his team's defense. And Romo has a career W-L record well above .500 anyway.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree. Also, I sympathize with your frustration about your team not making a good playoff run in so long, but Romo is NOT the problem here.
Lastly, if Romo ever wins a SB with the Cowboys, aren't you going to feel a little stupid now? Maybe too stupid to even celebrate? Something to think about.
<< <i>>>>Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid. <<<
unwoundsage - you are the stupid one here. The stats that count clearly show Romo last behind Roger, Troy and Danny.
To call Aikman overrated is the MOST STUPID statement I have ever heard!!!! >>
Once again, we are all stupid here except you or you are just too blind to see your ignorance.
Aikman was garbage before a team with an historical O-line was built around him. Aikman was 14-24 before he got his O-line. With that O-line gone, he was 24-28 his last 4 years. Only posting this because you think the only thing that matters is wins.
EDIT TO ADD: Let me do the math for you. With the exception of the semi-dominant 5 year run, he was 38-52 as a starter over the other 6 years.
In the Denver game both the Dallas defense and the Denver defense were horrible. If either defense had played even an average game, that team would have won the game. But that did not happen.
Both defenses allowed the other team to score 48 points. The game was a tie with less than 3 minutes to go. You could, if you wanted to, reset the scoreboard to 0-0. The first 57+ minutes of the game were very exciting (if you like offense) but the horrible defenses on both sides negated each other. It does not matter how anyone spins it, the game was tied with less than 3 minutes to go.
Dallas and Romo had the ball and had victory in their pocket (all they had to do was march down the field against a swiss cheese Denver defense, eat up the clock to prevent Manning and the Denver offense from getting back on the field, and kick a field goal with 2 seconds left). There was nothing Denver could have done to stop Dallas and Romo from driving down the field to kick a game winning field goal except get a turnover. Romo turned the ball over by forcing a pass into tight coverage that he did not need to do. The pass was intercepted, Denver took over and did exactly what Dallas would have done absent to the turnover (eat up the clock and kick a game winning field goal as time expires so as to not allow Romo and the Dallas offense back on the field).
So yes, in the Denver game Romo's error cost Dallas a win. The Dallas defense carries plenty of blame for the loss, however the ineffectiveness of the Dallas defense was negated by the similarly horrible Denver defense that allowed Romo and the Dallas offense to score 48 points. But for the Romo interception Dallas would have won the game. Because of the Romo interception Denver won the game.
<< <i>In the Denver game both the Dallas defense and the Denver defense were horrible. If either defense had played even an average game, that team would have won the game. But that did not happen. >>
So trying to pin the loss on Romo is an exercise in futility. Thank you for admitting it.
<< <i>Both defenses allowed the other team to score 48 points. The game was a tie with less than 3 minutes to go. You could, if you wanted to, reset the scoreboard to 0-0. The first 57+ minutes of the game were very exciting (if you like offense) but the horrible defenses on both sides negated each other. It does not matter how anyone spins it, the game was tied with less than 3 minutes to go. >>
However, as you stated earlier, if either team had played even average defense, it would have been a blowout and would be foolish to suggest either QB is to blame for their team's defenses sucking wind.
<< <i>Dallas and Romo had the ball and had victory in their pocket (all they had to do was march down the field against a swiss cheese Denver defense, eat up the clock to prevent Manning and the Denver offense from getting back on the field, and kick a field goal with 2 seconds left). There was nothing Denver could have done to stop Dallas and Romo from driving down the field to kick a game winning field goal except get a turnover. Romo turned the ball over by forcing a pass into tight coverage that he did not need to do. The pass was intercepted, Denver took over and did exactly what Dallas would have done absent to the turnover (eat up the clock and kick a game winning field goal as time expires so as to not allow Romo and the Dallas offense back on the field). >>
Did you even watch the replays of the play in which one of Romo's lineman stepped directly on him just as he was releasing the ball, which caused the ball to be picked off? Of course not, that wouldn't feed into the 'Romo is a choker!' which people seem to love to push.
<< <i>So yes, in the Denver game Romo's error cost Dallas a win. >>
This is in direct conflict with the first two lines of your post. Either the defense was terrible or it wasn't. However you admitted Dallas' defense was awful, so by extension THEY should be pinned for the loss, not Romo. Now you want to claim Romo, and not a defense that allowed 48 points, is to blame? I'm confused.
<< <i>The Dallas defense carries plenty of blame for the loss, however the ineffectiveness of the Dallas defense was negated by the similarly horrible Denver defense that allowed Romo and the Dallas offense to score 48 points. But for the Romo interception Dallas would have won the game. Because of the Romo interception Denver won the game. >>
So in your world the only play that matters is the last one. Let's bypass the facts that Romo threw for over 500 yards and 5 TDs, instead let's focus on one play in which a lineman stepped on him. Yep, that sounds intellectually honest.
<< <i>In the Denver game Romo's interception allowed Denver to win the game and it deprived Dallas the opportunity to kick a game winning field goal.
Over all he played great the entire game, but his error cost Dallas a victory. Simple as that. >>
No, Dallas' abysmal defense (by your own admission) allowed Denver to win the game. If either (a) Romo doesn't have the game of his career, or (b) Dallas' defense plays even league average defense, then that final drive has no bearing whatsoever on the game.
It's comical how completely short-sighted and ignorant some people chose to be simply to continue believing what they want to believe. But you know what? Forget it, enjoy living in your world where Romo is the reason a team loses a 51-48 game.
No Denver's abysmal defense would have allowed Dallas to win the game, but for Romo throwing into forced coverage when he did not have to do so resulting in a turnover [and Denver's offense coming back onto the field which allowed it to score the winning field goal instead of Dallas].
It's comical how completely short-sighted and ignorant some people chose to be simply to continue believing what they want to believe. But you know what? Forget it, enjoy living in your world where Romo (who turns the ball over to Denver so it can run out the clock and kick the winning field goal) is not the reason why a team loses a game 51-48 after two lousy defenses allow two high powered offenses to score at will in the first 57+ minutes of the game resulting in a 48-48 tie
<< <i>In the Denver game Romo's interception allowed Denver to win the game and it deprived Dallas the opportunity to kick a game winning field goal.
Over all he played great the entire game, but his error cost Dallas a victory. Simple as that. >>
And one.
Amazing how hard it is for some to grasp this. Clearly, "elite" is defined myriad ways in this very thread. In 1985's world, Tony is elite based on 506 and 5 alone, regardless of what transpires when the game is actually on the line. In my world, 506 and 5 only means something when you follow that up by cramming the ball down an inept defense's throat and actually winning the game. Once again, amazing how a defense that had given up 48 points was somehow, someway able to make THE play to win the game. In what world should that have ever happened against an "elite" quarterback who basically did what he wanted for almost 60 minutes? At home, no less?
And if you once again choose to go the piss poor defense route, I'll once again shred you with facts, 1985fan. I'll be more than happy to provide you with the statistical ranks of Indianapolis' and New Orleans' D the years they won the Super Bowl. You know, concrete examples of truly elite quarterbacks winning with deficient defenses. And right on cue, you'll naturally choose to ignore it (again) because it'll fly directly in the face of your love affair with TR. Even when he had the #2 ranked defense at his disposal, he got his ass kicked in the playoffs back in '09. The very next week, Drew Brees miraculously beat the exact same team with a D ranked in the lower half of the league. Let me help you out here: one quarterback is very good, while the other is elite.
For every fourth quarter rating you come up with, I'll provide you with one playoff victory in seven years. For every other statistical achievement attained during the course of the regular season, I'll provide you with his record in elimination games. And if you have another bout of amnesia and start meandering through your own personal field of excuses -- namely placing the onus on his teammates when things don't go according to plan -- I'll be more than happy to hold your hand and direct you to the paragraph above this one so you can read it again.
Finally, the most laughable aspect of this entire thread is your interpretation of his pick against the Broncos. Do me a ginormous favor and go watch the play again since you clearly missed it the first time. Instead of offering up the pathetic excuse of having his foot stepped on, watch it numerous times if you must and try to comprehend how it was (fasten your seat belt) Tony's fault. Tell you what, I'll help a brother out. Watch DeMarco Murray verrrrry closely. He comes out of the backfield and parks it a few yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Not a SOUL around him. Instead of making the safe, prudent throw deep in his own end of the field, TR tried to squeeze it into.....wait for it.....wait for it.....TRIPLE coverage. Game, set, match. Let me guess, that was DeMarcus Ware's fault? Danny White's? Clint Longley's? The CU moderator's?
With all of that being said, Tony did the exact opposite this past Sunday. He did exactly what an upper echelon quarterback is supposed to do. He initially threw a pick, but he was granted a reprieve and ultimately crammed the ball down an inept defense's throat and won the game when it was on the line. He should be extolled as a result, and I have no problem saying that. But what is going to happen in weeks 16, 17 and (perhaps) beyond when the Cowboys are vying for a playoff berth and (perhaps) a deep run? Are we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face? If it's the latter, he'll go home.........again. And you'll be proved wrong.......again.
For people who are unable to unwilling to find it for themselves, there was an excellent bit on ESPN's 'SportScience' that explained why the Romo pass turned into an INT, I have the link for you:
"The first disruption in the play comes when Tyron Smith is pushed back into Romo and their feet get tangled forcing Romo to take a short lead step into his throw. This causes his hip rotation to shorten and reduces the velocity of the throw.
The second disruption begins when Broncos linebacker, Danny Trevathan, takes a shorter angle to the ball than Cowboys tight end, Gavin Escobar. This allows Trevathan to arrive at the ball 16 feet from Romo as opposed to 17 feet by Escobar.
Trevathan extends a full seven feet before leaving the ground to grab the ball and thus sealing the victory for the Broncos.
Not that it will change the minds of dimeman and sanction, who, despite overwhelming EVIDENCE and FACTS, have their fingers in their ears and are stomping their feet that they are right and everyone else is wrong.
<< <i> Amazing how hard it is for some to grasp this. Clearly, "elite" is defined myriad ways in this very thread. In 1985's world, Tony is elite based on 506 and 5 alone, regardless of what transpires when the game is actually on the line. In my world, 506 and 5 only means something when you follow that up by cramming the ball down an inept defense's throat and actually winning the game. Once again, amazing how a defense that had given up 48 points was somehow, someway able to make THE play to win the game. In what world should that have ever happened against an "elite" quarterback who basically did what he wanted for almost 60 minutes? At home, no less? >>
What's amazing is how foolish and ignorant you and the other Romo haters clearly are. What's wrong, your Texans have a joke at QB so you have to jab at the wildly successful other Texas team QB? Jealousy is a stinky cologne, my friend. But then when your team is busy setting records for consecutive games with pick sixes, you're going to lash out. It's ok! Not everyone can have an elite level QB like Romo!
<< <i>And if you once again choose to go the piss poor defense route, I'll once again shred you with facts, 1985fan. I'll be more than happy to provide you with the statistical ranks of Indianapolis' and New Orleans' D the years they won the Super Bowl. You know, concrete examples of truly elite quarterbacks winning with deficient defenses. And right on cue, you'll naturally choose to ignore it (again) because it'll fly directly in the face of your love affair with TR. Even when he had the #2 ranked defense at his disposal, he got his ass kicked in the playoffs back in '09. The very next week, Drew Brees miraculously beat the exact same team with a D ranked in the lower half of the league. Let me help you out here: one quarterback is very good, while the other is elite. >>
If are going to sit there and say a 500+ yard, 5 TD, 1 INT day isn't elite, then, my friend, there's nothing else to say. Period.
<< <i>For every fourth quarter rating you come up with, I'll provide you with one playoff victory in seven years. >>
Yes, because Romo is responsible for the team make up around him. He's responsible for personnel. He's responsible for NO running game and NO defense. Good lord you really are a dense one, aren't you?
<< <i> For every other statistical achievement attained during the course of the regular season, I'll provide you with his record in elimination games. And if you have another bout of amnesia and start meandering through your own personal field of excuses -- namely placing the onus on his teammates when things don't go according to plan -- I'll be more than happy to hold your hand and direct you to the paragraph above this one so you can read it again. >>
Willing to choose to not learn when the facts and evidence are clearly laid out for you is willful ignorance - something you and the other Romo detractors have in SPADES.
<< <i>Finally, the most laughable aspect of this entire thread is your interpretation of his pick against the Broncos. Do me a ginormous favor and go watch the play again since you clearly missed it the first time. Instead of offering up the pathetic excuse of having his foot stepped on, watch it numerous times if you must and try to comprehend how it was (fasten your seat belt) Tony's fault. Tell you what, I'll help a brother out. Watch DeMarco Murray verrrrry closely. He comes out of the backfield and parks it a few yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Not a SOUL around him. Instead of making the safe, prudent throw deep in his own end of the field, TR tried to squeeze it into.....wait for it.....wait for it.....TRIPLE coverage. Game, set, match. Let me guess, that was DeMarcus Ware's fault? Danny White's? Clint Longley's? The CU moderator's? >>
Despite getting stepped on, and despite his receiver running a garbage route, the defender still had to make a miraculous play to pick it off. Good lord there is no end to your ignorance is there?
<< <i>With all of that being said, Tony did the exact opposite this past Sunday. He did exactly what an upper echelon quarterback is supposed to do. He initially threw a pick, but he was granted a reprieve and ultimately crammed the ball down an inept defense's throat and won the game when it was on the line. He should be extolled as a result, and I have no problem saying that. But what is going to happen in weeks 16, 17 and (perhaps) beyond when the Cowboys are vying for a playoff berth and (perhaps) a deep run? Are we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face? If it's the latter, he'll go home.........again. And you'll be proved wrong.......again. >>
The pick happened on second and 16 (or are those pesky facts getting in the way, stownie?). A dink pass would have accomplished exactly nothing. But let's say for the sake of argument that sets up a best case scenario 3rd and 10. The likelihood of converting that is extremely slim (Dallas is converting all third downs about 1/3 of the time, less on long). So now, it's fourth down, they have to punt, and the Dallas defense hasn't stopped Manning all day. Manning drives them down and kicks the same FG. Are going to sit there and suggest that you'd be any less harsh on Romo? Because his offensive line broke down on first down and allowed that six yard sack in the first place? Of course not. You'd be hammering him for not taking enough risk and throwing the ball down the field.
Long story short: teams with crummy QBs (and the Texans qualify!) hate on Romo because he's infinitely better than the garbage they have. They pick apart things that are completely out of his control in a pathetic, desperate, and ignorant effort to defame a guy running the most popular team in America. Good gravy you must be absolutely miserable to hang out with if you have so much negative energy for a guy who isn't even in your team's division!
re we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face?
Hold on Galazy27, are we still talking about Romo or were you bringing up Peyton in last years playoff game against the Ravens? Or were you bringing up Favre in the Championship game between the Vikings and the Saints or perhaps Favre in the Championship game between the Packers and the Eagles? I'm confused as to which "elite" QB you are referring to.
#1) I'm not stown. Not sure what's more remarkable, the fact that you still have yet to figure that out, or the fact that you're an alt and still have yet to figure that out.
#2) I'm a lifelong Bears fan, so save the energy in your fingers and avoid referencing the Texans.
#3) You're a Buccaneers fan, so save the energy in your fingers and avoid referencing the Texans.
<< <i>re we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face?
Hold on Galazy27, are we still talking about Romo or were you bringing up Peyton in last years playoff game against the Ravens? Or were you bringing up Favre in the Championship game between the Vikings and the Saints or perhaps Favre in the Championship game between the Packers and the Eagles? I'm confused as to which "elite" QB you are referring to. >>
Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me.
<< <i>Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me. >>
Not sure which thread you've been reading, but we're talking about quarterbacks that are perceived to be elite based on their bodies of work. Rypien, Dilfer, Williams, and Hostetler are irrelevant in the context of this discussion, unless you'd personally like to throw them in as well. Hopefully you won't, but seeing as you're siding with the obtuse one, one never knows.
This thread is discussing the topic of "elite" QB's and whether Romo is or is not one.
"Elite" is a very vague term, but in my view it refers to the type of athlete who not only wants the ball in crunch time (i.e., playoffs or a game that needs to be won to make the playoffs) but who demonstrates that he (or she) has that special something that allows him (or her) to perform and their best and actually deliver a victory. Some athletes who want the ball in crunch time (which is admirable) can not deliver in crunch time. A few of these types of athletes can and do deliver in crunch time. Michael Jordan is an example of just such an athlete.
As for Tony Romo, he may want the ball in crunch time, but he has not yet demonstrated that he can deliver in crunch time. He may reach that level before his career is over, but it has not happened yet. Hopefully he will get there, if only to promote peace between Dimeman and 1985fan
Every time you or Dimeman bring up some tell tale barometer of a QBs worth, and it is proven to be without any real merit by true football fans, you switch to some other new tell tale barometer.
The sad thing is my original argument had nothing to do with Romo being elite or not. My point, also realized by my young daughter, is that only"haters" could blame a QB for being outscored 51 -48.
Since there is no entrance exam required to get on these boards, you will find a few others who agree with you, but we both know how the great majority would view the Romo/defense blame game.
<< <i>Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me. >>
Not sure which thread you've been reading, but we're talking about quarterbacks that are perceived to be elite based on their bodies of work. Rypien, Dilfer, Williams, and Hostetler are irrelevant in the context of this discussion, unless you'd personally like to throw them in as well. Hopefully you won't, but seeing as you're siding with the obtuse one, one never knows. >>
Either playoff wins make you elite (which is why you say Romo isn't), or it doesn't. Dan Fouts won 3 playoff games in his career, lost 4, and never won a super bowl. Does that mean he's not elite? Dan Marino 8-10 and no ring. Is he elite?
This entire argument about trying to equate playoff/super bowl wins and a level of eliteness is ridiculous and arbitrary, which is exactly why those lacking the ability to understand football use it. They can twist the argument to whatever line of reasoning they want it to mean, without ONCE realizing that playoff wins are a function of the team!
<< <i>This thread is discussing the topic of "elite" QB's and whether Romo is or is not one.
"Elite" is a very vague term, but in my view it refers to the type of athlete who not only wants the ball in crunch time (i.e., playoffs or a game that needs to be won to make the playoffs) but who demonstrates that he (or she) has that special something that allows him (or her) to perform and their best and actually deliver a victory. Some athletes who want the ball in crunch time (which is admirable) can not deliver in crunch time. A few of these types of athletes can and do deliver in crunch time. Michael Jordan is an example of just such an athlete.
As for Tony Romo, he may want the ball in crunch time, but he has not yet demonstrated that he can deliver in crunch time. He may reach that level before his career is over, but it has not happened yet. Hopefully he will get there, if only to promote peace between Dimeman and 1985fan >>
Dan Marino was a superior QB to Troy Aikman.
Aikman was part of three championship teams. Marino zero.
So where are you drawing the body of work line, compared to that of showing your definition of being able to deliver in 'the big moments'?
Brett Favre has one ring, Terry Bradshaw has four. Favre was superior.
Bradshaw(along with Aikman) are probably the most overrated QB's of all time who had the best supporting casts of all-time(neither of whom could have winning records or elite QB performances when they did NOT have those superior supporting casts).
Where are you drawing the body of work with the championships?
Someone claimed that Romo was like the 20th best QB in the league right now. Where exactly are you guys who diminish him, rank him among today's active QB's??
A little head start for you...
How many active QB's have won rings?
How many have higher QB performances or rating?
How many have MORE INT?
How many have more/less 4th quarter comebacks?
How many have better w/l records?
How many have glorious playoff records?
PS. If you guys say since a guy has won a ring, that he has 'proven' he could step up in a big game(based on ONE instance), then Romo has also PROVEN that he could step up and win a big game, because he has won a playoff game.
Romo's having a strong season stat wise but it could be even better if the receivers drop a fewer passes and Romo regains his accuracy (which has been a bit off the past month). This team is still a work in progress, the OL has two first year starters and the receiving core is young. The defense has changed schemes and the DL has been patch worked and the safeties are learning as they go.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
No matter how well Romo plays, if Dallas doesn't win, dimeman will blame Romo for the loss. Saints defense is better than most give it credit for, I think they're top 10 statwise. I'll go with 27-21 score, with Dallas winning.
Two minutes left in the 3rd corner and 'ole Tony is 7/15 with a grand total of 44 yards! Hard to believe that the GIANTS (the team I root for) will only be 1.5 games out. AMAZING! LOL
STAY HEALTHY!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
I always look forward to this. Nice pick, charlatan! >>
Where was your pick? Oh that's right, you don't have the stones to make picks, you just sit back and pick apart others who do. I think this image exemplified you *perfectly*:
Maybe at some point, after you start showing some courage, and, you know, actually MAKE a pick, I'll see you differently. But then you'd never do something that could possibly be picked apart, so you sit, HIDING, not making a pick, like a coward.
<< <i>Where was your pick? Oh that's right, you don't have the stones to make picks, you just sit back and pick apart others who do. I think this image exemplified you *perfectly* >>
Those meds you incessantly dish out sure do have a vile taste, don't they? To answer your question, it's where billwaltonsbeard's pick was. Unlike you, I'm not here to impress. Tell you what, though. Select the game of your choice this coming week and I'll appease you, alt boy.
For your sake, I just hope your prognostication "skills" don't leave this forum. You've proven time and again how little you know about sports, and when you really get brazen it just never ends well for you.
Perhaps it's time for you to head back over to the Redskins thread and tell yankeeno7 what a fool he is. Oh, that's right, you've been nowhere to be found ever since someone with true perspective entered the fray and blew holes in your interminable rants. Probably the wisest thing you've done thus far, C.J. Romo.
<< <i> Those meds you incessantly dish out sure do have a vile taste, don't they? To answer your question, it's where billwaltonsbeard's pick was. Unlike you, I'm not here to impress. Tell you what, though. Select the game of your choice this coming week and I'll appease you, alt boy. >>
You're not here to impress, and you haven't made a single pick all year. Hilarious. You bash others for making selections, yet offer none of your own. Even worse? You bring up playoff wins in this thread as if that somehow is a measure of a QB. Good lord you really aren't good at this thing called understanding team sports are you? But then, when you're Captain Hindsight, you're not in the business of making predictions.
That was one of the worst games I have ever seen this team play, they looked helpless out there. I understand the issues the defense has with injuries but I am not sure what is wrong with the offense. Romo continues to struggle with accuracy and his receivers aren't really helping either. The Cowboys need to get things figured out on offense during the bye week and the defense needs to get healthy. Ware should not of played last night but it was impressive to see him beat a tackle with one leg and literally limp is way applying pressure on Brees.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
Gave up a lot? Yeah, if "a lot" means an all time NFL record first downs to an opposing team. More than the great Chargers offenses of the late 70's, the Dolphins of the mid 80's, and the Colts or Patriots of the last decade.
Romo's numbers were awful last night, but awful would have been a huge improvement for the Defense.
You want to blame "3 and out Tony"? Maybe if the Defense could get a 3 and out early in a drive they wouldn't be so tired.
To summarize the game, Romo was terrible and the Cowboys Defense was the only thing more terrible.
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN.
A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner.
DIMEMAN finds a way to blame every loss on Romo and I think even blame some of their wins on Romo. And yet refuses to look elsewhere (namely defense).
Worst part is you get the feeling he takes more joy in being able to come on here and blame Romo for a loss, then he does to silently enjoy the Cowboys' victories.
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN. >>
True, true.
<< <i>A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner. >>
Well, you're right, he's definitely not a real fan.
<< <i>DIMEMAN finds a way to blame every loss on Romo and I think even blame some of their wins on Romo. And yet refuses to look elsewhere (namely defense).
Worst part is you get the feeling he takes more joy in being able to come on here and blame Romo for a loss, then he does to silently enjoy the Cowboys' victories. >>
Absolutely he does. It's pretty pathetic he gets more joy in watching Romo fail than in a Cowboys win. Even when he drove the team down to beat the Vikings in the final two minutes, he was trying to blame Romo for 'almost' losing the game!
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN.
A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner. >>
Any real Cowboys fan should be offended by dimeman calling himself a Cowboys fan.
If you want to cast blame, it falls in the same 2 places it always does, Jerry Jones and Garrett. Where would this team be with Rob Ryan as DC and anyone other than Garrett as head coach? For the sake of the Cowboys fans, I hope they finish at 7-9 and the Eagles win the division at 8-8 and maybe, just maybe, Garrett gets fired.
I'm not sure how much blame I place on Garrett, but he sure does deserve his share.
Last night's game when they are down 42 - 17 with about 11 minutes to play, he runs the ball?????? Was he killing the clock to keep the Saints from scoring more? I know that is a difficult deficit to overcome in that amount of time, but it is not impossible. And if he felt it was impossible, why keep your starting QB on the field? Only DIMEMAN would do something like that (in hopes of him getting injured so the secret weapon Kyle Orton could come off the bench)
Either try to win the freakin game or get out alive to fight another day.
Garrett's teams, excluding the half season when he took over for Wade Phillips, have been over .500 for a TOTAL of 6 games. In those 6 games, they went 2-4 with all but one of those losses dropping the team back to .500.
In an effort of finding common ground can we at least all agree that the Cowboys suck?
That defense is offensive. NFC East, yikes.
I proposed a trade of top 12 Qb's………….Romo for Cutler. Both cities seem to hate their current Qb's but yet there are 20 teams that would rather be in their place/ There are not enough good Qb's to go around.
Romo is far from elite but is well above average in today's NFL talent wise.
MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>In an effort of finding common ground can we at least all agree that the Cowboys suck?
That defense is offensive. NFC East, yikes.
I proposed a trade of top 12 Qb's………….Romo for Cutler. Both cities seem to hate their current Qb's but yet there are 20 teams that would rather be in their place/ There are not enough good Qb's to go around.
Romo is far from elite but is well above average in today's NFL talent wise.
MJ >>
Cowboys don't suck. Defense is horrible (see Rob Ryan comments earlier in thread). Offense has to be in the top 2 or 3 in the NFL in pure talent just like they are every year. If a team with that much perennial talent continues to be mediocre, it all falls back on coaching. No other reason.
Cutler has always been garbage. Every now and then he has a game where you see what he could be if he played his best every game.
If you put any other QB in the league, with the exception of Peyton or Brady, into the Cowboys offense with Garrett calling the plays any time in the last 3 years at best the Cowboys might win 1 extra game a season. Even if Peyton was the Cowboys QB this season they may only win one extra game. Can not give up 4+ TDs almost every game and expect to win.
The problem with ignorant sports fans I think lies in the unprecedented access to information. They think because they see so much more than they ever have, that naturally they know it all.
Dallas' primary issue, which has been noted, is Jerry Jones. He lucked out with his Super Bowl wins, and since then, his teams have been a mess. His ego simply will not allow him to hire a GM that knows personnel, and his 'solution' is to continue to throw good money after bad chasing talent. Since he doesn't know how to evaluate talent, this problem only escalates.
Those fans who want to blame Romo simply are unwilling or unable to process the data that is readily available and instead want to take a shortcut.
Comments
<< <i>So you say Romo isn't even close to being equal to past Cowboys QBs, all of which were on great TEAMS with all time great coaches including Aikman who is the most overrated QB south of Joe Namath. Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid. >>
Exactly, he posted an article which I conveniently helped out and showed how well he's played and all he does is plug his ears like a child and stomp his feet. The only number he can possibly grasp is 'playoff wins', and, as with most entitled, spoiled brat franchises, thinks that playoff wins are a given. Anyone who doesn't reach that rare air is somehow a bum. The very idea he puts Danny friggin White ahead of Romo shows the full display of this guys inability to understand the team game of football.
unwoundsage - you are the stupid one here. The stats that count clearly show Romo last behind Roger, Troy and Danny.
To call Aikman overrated is the MOST STUPID statement I have ever heard!!!!
I think it's time for you to concede at least a few things:
1. Romo is a great NFL QB. His record over the past 8 seasons backs it up.
2. The loss to Den. is NOT on Romo. You can't ignore what happened in the first 58 or so minutes of the game. Pretty much any QB besides Romo, and the Cowboys would have lost in a blowout- there would not have been any clutch situation.
3. It is just nonsense to judge a QB soley on his ability to win games. Football is far too much of a team sport for that. Let me make a baseball comparison.
If a pitcher goes 12-18 with a 2.50 ERA, you'd probably say he had a terrible season. He only won 2/5 of his decisions. I'd say he had a great season. The pitcher's only job is to keep the other team from scoring. It was probably terrible run support, which is beyond a pitcher's control, that caused the 12-18 record.
Just the same, a QB has no control over the play of his team's defense. And Romo has a career W-L record well above .500 anyway.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree. Also, I sympathize with your frustration about your team not making a good playoff run in so long, but Romo is NOT the problem here.
Lastly, if Romo ever wins a SB with the Cowboys, aren't you going to feel a little stupid now? Maybe too stupid to even celebrate? Something to think about.
<< <i>>>>Yet, you post stats that show Romo is far superior to all of them even though he has never had a great team around him or a decent coach. I give up. You can't fix stupid. <<<
unwoundsage - you are the stupid one here. The stats that count clearly show Romo last behind Roger, Troy and Danny.
To call Aikman overrated is the MOST STUPID statement I have ever heard!!!! >>
Once again, we are all stupid here except you or you are just too blind to see your ignorance.
Aikman was garbage before a team with an historical O-line was built around him. Aikman was 14-24 before he got his O-line. With that O-line gone, he was 24-28 his last 4 years. Only posting this because you think the only thing that matters is wins.
EDIT TO ADD: Let me do the math for you. With the exception of the semi-dominant 5 year run, he was 38-52 as a starter over the other 6 years.
Both defenses allowed the other team to score 48 points. The game was a tie with less than 3 minutes to go. You could, if you wanted to, reset the scoreboard to 0-0. The first 57+ minutes of the game were very exciting (if you like offense) but the horrible defenses on both sides negated each other. It does not matter how anyone spins it, the game was tied with less than 3 minutes to go.
Dallas and Romo had the ball and had victory in their pocket (all they had to do was march down the field against a swiss cheese Denver defense, eat up the clock to prevent Manning and the Denver offense from getting back on the field, and kick a field goal with 2 seconds left). There was nothing Denver could have done to stop Dallas and Romo from driving down the field to kick a game winning field goal except get a turnover. Romo turned the ball over by forcing a pass into tight coverage that he did not need to do. The pass was intercepted, Denver took over and did exactly what Dallas would have done absent to the turnover (eat up the clock and kick a game winning field goal as time expires so as to not allow Romo and the Dallas offense back on the field).
So yes, in the Denver game Romo's error cost Dallas a win. The Dallas defense carries plenty of blame for the loss, however the ineffectiveness of the Dallas defense was negated by the similarly horrible Denver defense that allowed Romo and the Dallas offense to score 48 points. But for the Romo interception Dallas would have won the game. Because of the Romo interception Denver won the game.
<< <i>In the Denver game both the Dallas defense and the Denver defense were horrible. If either defense had played even an average game, that team would have won the game. But that did not happen. >>
So trying to pin the loss on Romo is an exercise in futility. Thank you for admitting it.
<< <i>Both defenses allowed the other team to score 48 points. The game was a tie with less than 3 minutes to go. You could, if you wanted to, reset the scoreboard to 0-0. The first 57+ minutes of the game were very exciting (if you like offense) but the horrible defenses on both sides negated each other. It does not matter how anyone spins it, the game was tied with less than 3 minutes to go. >>
However, as you stated earlier, if either team had played even average defense, it would have been a blowout and would be foolish to suggest either QB is to blame for their team's defenses sucking wind.
<< <i>Dallas and Romo had the ball and had victory in their pocket (all they had to do was march down the field against a swiss cheese Denver defense, eat up the clock to prevent Manning and the Denver offense from getting back on the field, and kick a field goal with 2 seconds left). There was nothing Denver could have done to stop Dallas and Romo from driving down the field to kick a game winning field goal except get a turnover. Romo turned the ball over by forcing a pass into tight coverage that he did not need to do. The pass was intercepted, Denver took over and did exactly what Dallas would have done absent to the turnover (eat up the clock and kick a game winning field goal as time expires so as to not allow Romo and the Dallas offense back on the field). >>
Did you even watch the replays of the play in which one of Romo's lineman stepped directly on him just as he was releasing the ball, which caused the ball to be picked off? Of course not, that wouldn't feed into the 'Romo is a choker!' which people seem to love to push.
<< <i>So yes, in the Denver game Romo's error cost Dallas a win. >>
This is in direct conflict with the first two lines of your post. Either the defense was terrible or it wasn't. However you admitted Dallas' defense was awful, so by extension THEY should be pinned for the loss, not Romo. Now you want to claim Romo, and not a defense that allowed 48 points, is to blame? I'm confused.
<< <i>The Dallas defense carries plenty of blame for the loss, however the ineffectiveness of the Dallas defense was negated by the similarly horrible Denver defense that allowed Romo and the Dallas offense to score 48 points. But for the Romo interception Dallas would have won the game. Because of the Romo interception Denver won the game. >>
So in your world the only play that matters is the last one. Let's bypass the facts that Romo threw for over 500 yards and 5 TDs, instead let's focus on one play in which a lineman stepped on him. Yep, that sounds intellectually honest.
Over all he played great the entire game, but his error cost Dallas a victory. Simple as that.
<< <i>In the Denver game Romo's interception allowed Denver to win the game and it deprived Dallas the opportunity to kick a game winning field goal.
Over all he played great the entire game, but his error cost Dallas a victory. Simple as that. >>
No, Dallas' abysmal defense (by your own admission) allowed Denver to win the game. If either (a) Romo doesn't have the game of his career, or (b) Dallas' defense plays even league average defense, then that final drive has no bearing whatsoever on the game.
It's comical how completely short-sighted and ignorant some people chose to be simply to continue believing what they want to believe. But you know what? Forget it, enjoy living in your world where Romo is the reason a team loses a 51-48 game.
It's comical how completely short-sighted and ignorant some people chose to be simply to continue believing what they want to believe. But you know what? Forget it, enjoy living in your world where Romo (who turns the ball over to Denver so it can run out the clock and kick the winning field goal) is not the reason why a team loses a game 51-48 after two lousy defenses allow two high powered offenses to score at will in the first 57+ minutes of the game resulting in a 48-48 tie
SanctionII, the scariest thing about your posts is knowing that someone on this planet actually thinks like DIMEMAN
<< <i>In the Denver game Romo's interception allowed Denver to win the game and it deprived Dallas the opportunity to kick a game winning field goal.
Over all he played great the entire game, but his error cost Dallas a victory. Simple as that. >>
And one.
Amazing how hard it is for some to grasp this. Clearly, "elite" is defined myriad ways in this very thread. In 1985's world, Tony is elite based on 506 and 5 alone, regardless of what transpires when the game is actually on the line. In my world, 506 and 5 only means something when you follow that up by cramming the ball down an inept defense's throat and actually winning the game. Once again, amazing how a defense that had given up 48 points was somehow, someway able to make THE play to win the game. In what world should that have ever happened against an "elite" quarterback who basically did what he wanted for almost 60 minutes? At home, no less?
And if you once again choose to go the piss poor defense route, I'll once again shred you with facts, 1985fan. I'll be more than happy to provide you with the statistical ranks of Indianapolis' and New Orleans' D the years they won the Super Bowl. You know, concrete examples of truly elite quarterbacks winning with deficient defenses. And right on cue, you'll naturally choose to ignore it (again) because it'll fly directly in the face of your love affair with TR. Even when he had the #2 ranked defense at his disposal, he got his ass kicked in the playoffs back in '09. The very next week, Drew Brees miraculously beat the exact same team with a D ranked in the lower half of the league. Let me help you out here: one quarterback is very good, while the other is elite.
For every fourth quarter rating you come up with, I'll provide you with one playoff victory in seven years. For every other statistical achievement attained during the course of the regular season, I'll provide you with his record in elimination games. And if you have another bout of amnesia and start meandering through your own personal field of excuses -- namely placing the onus on his teammates when things don't go according to plan -- I'll be more than happy to hold your hand and direct you to the paragraph above this one so you can read it again.
Finally, the most laughable aspect of this entire thread is your interpretation of his pick against the Broncos. Do me a ginormous favor and go watch the play again since you clearly missed it the first time. Instead of offering up the pathetic excuse of having his foot stepped on, watch it numerous times if you must and try to comprehend how it was (fasten your seat belt) Tony's fault. Tell you what, I'll help a brother out. Watch DeMarco Murray verrrrry closely. He comes out of the backfield and parks it a few yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Not a SOUL around him. Instead of making the safe, prudent throw deep in his own end of the field, TR tried to squeeze it into.....wait for it.....wait for it.....TRIPLE coverage. Game, set, match. Let me guess, that was DeMarcus Ware's fault? Danny White's? Clint Longley's? The CU moderator's?
With all of that being said, Tony did the exact opposite this past Sunday. He did exactly what an upper echelon quarterback is supposed to do. He initially threw a pick, but he was granted a reprieve and ultimately crammed the ball down an inept defense's throat and won the game when it was on the line. He should be extolled as a result, and I have no problem saying that. But what is going to happen in weeks 16, 17 and (perhaps) beyond when the Cowboys are vying for a playoff berth and (perhaps) a deep run? Are we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face? If it's the latter, he'll go home.........again. And you'll be proved wrong.......again.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
Link for the lazy
"The first disruption in the play comes when Tyron Smith is pushed back into Romo and their feet get tangled forcing Romo to take a short lead step into his throw. This causes his hip rotation to shorten and reduces the velocity of the throw.
The second disruption begins when Broncos linebacker, Danny Trevathan, takes a shorter angle to the ball than Cowboys tight end, Gavin Escobar. This allows Trevathan to arrive at the ball 16 feet from Romo as opposed to 17 feet by Escobar.
Trevathan extends a full seven feet before leaving the ground to grab the ball and thus sealing the victory for the Broncos.
Not that it will change the minds of dimeman and sanction, who, despite overwhelming EVIDENCE and FACTS, have their fingers in their ears and are stomping their feet that they are right and everyone else is wrong.
<< <i>
Amazing how hard it is for some to grasp this. Clearly, "elite" is defined myriad ways in this very thread. In 1985's world, Tony is elite based on 506 and 5 alone, regardless of what transpires when the game is actually on the line. In my world, 506 and 5 only means something when you follow that up by cramming the ball down an inept defense's throat and actually winning the game. Once again, amazing how a defense that had given up 48 points was somehow, someway able to make THE play to win the game. In what world should that have ever happened against an "elite" quarterback who basically did what he wanted for almost 60 minutes? At home, no less? >>
What's amazing is how foolish and ignorant you and the other Romo haters clearly are. What's wrong, your Texans have a joke at QB so you have to jab at the wildly successful other Texas team QB? Jealousy is a stinky cologne, my friend. But then when your team is busy setting records for consecutive games with pick sixes, you're going to lash out. It's ok! Not everyone can have an elite level QB like Romo!
<< <i>And if you once again choose to go the piss poor defense route, I'll once again shred you with facts, 1985fan. I'll be more than happy to provide you with the statistical ranks of Indianapolis' and New Orleans' D the years they won the Super Bowl. You know, concrete examples of truly elite quarterbacks winning with deficient defenses. And right on cue, you'll naturally choose to ignore it (again) because it'll fly directly in the face of your love affair with TR. Even when he had the #2 ranked defense at his disposal, he got his ass kicked in the playoffs back in '09. The very next week, Drew Brees miraculously beat the exact same team with a D ranked in the lower half of the league. Let me help you out here: one quarterback is very good, while the other is elite. >>
If are going to sit there and say a 500+ yard, 5 TD, 1 INT day isn't elite, then, my friend, there's nothing else to say. Period.
<< <i>For every fourth quarter rating you come up with, I'll provide you with one playoff victory in seven years. >>
Yes, because Romo is responsible for the team make up around him. He's responsible for personnel. He's responsible for NO running game and NO defense. Good lord you really are a dense one, aren't you?
<< <i> For every other statistical achievement attained during the course of the regular season, I'll provide you with his record in elimination games. And if you have another bout of amnesia and start meandering through your own personal field of excuses -- namely placing the onus on his teammates when things don't go according to plan -- I'll be more than happy to hold your hand and direct you to the paragraph above this one so you can read it again. >>
Willing to choose to not learn when the facts and evidence are clearly laid out for you is willful ignorance - something you and the other Romo detractors have in SPADES.
<< <i>Finally, the most laughable aspect of this entire thread is your interpretation of his pick against the Broncos. Do me a ginormous favor and go watch the play again since you clearly missed it the first time. Instead of offering up the pathetic excuse of having his foot stepped on, watch it numerous times if you must and try to comprehend how it was (fasten your seat belt) Tony's fault. Tell you what, I'll help a brother out. Watch DeMarco Murray verrrrry closely. He comes out of the backfield and parks it a few yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Not a SOUL around him. Instead of making the safe, prudent throw deep in his own end of the field, TR tried to squeeze it into.....wait for it.....wait for it.....TRIPLE coverage. Game, set, match. Let me guess, that was DeMarcus Ware's fault? Danny White's? Clint Longley's? The CU moderator's? >>
Despite getting stepped on, and despite his receiver running a garbage route, the defender still had to make a miraculous play to pick it off. Good lord there is no end to your ignorance is there?
<< <i>With all of that being said, Tony did the exact opposite this past Sunday. He did exactly what an upper echelon quarterback is supposed to do. He initially threw a pick, but he was granted a reprieve and ultimately crammed the ball down an inept defense's throat and won the game when it was on the line. He should be extolled as a result, and I have no problem saying that. But what is going to happen in weeks 16, 17 and (perhaps) beyond when the Cowboys are vying for a playoff berth and (perhaps) a deep run? Are we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face? If it's the latter, he'll go home.........again. And you'll be proved wrong.......again. >>
The pick happened on second and 16 (or are those pesky facts getting in the way, stownie?). A dink pass would have accomplished exactly nothing. But let's say for the sake of argument that sets up a best case scenario 3rd and 10. The likelihood of converting that is extremely slim (Dallas is converting all third downs about 1/3 of the time, less on long). So now, it's fourth down, they have to punt, and the Dallas defense hasn't stopped Manning all day. Manning drives them down and kicks the same FG. Are going to sit there and suggest that you'd be any less harsh on Romo? Because his offensive line broke down on first down and allowed that six yard sack in the first place? Of course not. You'd be hammering him for not taking enough risk and throwing the ball down the field.
Long story short: teams with crummy QBs (and the Texans qualify!) hate on Romo because he's infinitely better than the garbage they have. They pick apart things that are completely out of his control in a pathetic, desperate, and ignorant effort to defame a guy running the most popular team in America. Good gravy you must be absolutely miserable to hang out with if you have so much negative energy for a guy who isn't even in your team's division!
Hold on Galazy27, are we still talking about Romo or were you bringing up Peyton in last years playoff game against the Ravens? Or were you bringing up Favre in the Championship game between the Vikings and the Saints or perhaps Favre in the Championship game between the Packers and the Eagles? I'm confused as to which "elite" QB you are referring to.
#2) I'm a lifelong Bears fan, so save the energy in your fingers and avoid referencing the Texans.
#3) You're a Buccaneers fan, so save the energy in your fingers and avoid referencing the Texans.
#4) Watch and replay until it sinks in.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
<< <i>re we going to see Mr. 4Q QBR or Mr. Try-to-fit-it-into-triple-coverage-with-the-game-on-the-line-when-I-have-a-wide-open-teammate-right-in-front-of-my-face?
Hold on Galazy27, are we still talking about Romo or were you bringing up Peyton in last years playoff game against the Ravens? Or were you bringing up Favre in the Championship game between the Vikings and the Saints or perhaps Favre in the Championship game between the Packers and the Eagles? I'm confused as to which "elite" QB you are referring to. >>
Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
Still confused?
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me.
<< <i>Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me. >>
Not sure which thread you've been reading, but we're talking about quarterbacks that are perceived to be elite based on their bodies of work. Rypien, Dilfer, Williams, and Hostetler are irrelevant in the context of this discussion, unless you'd personally like to throw them in as well. Hopefully you won't, but seeing as you're siding with the obtuse one, one never knows.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
"Elite" is a very vague term, but in my view it refers to the type of athlete who not only wants the ball in crunch time (i.e., playoffs or a game that needs to be won to make the playoffs) but who demonstrates that he (or she) has that special something that allows him (or her) to perform and their best and actually deliver a victory. Some athletes who want the ball in crunch time (which is admirable) can not deliver in crunch time. A few of these types of athletes can and do deliver in crunch time. Michael Jordan is an example of just such an athlete.
As for Tony Romo, he may want the ball in crunch time, but he has not yet demonstrated that he can deliver in crunch time. He may reach that level before his career is over, but it has not happened yet. Hopefully he will get there, if only to promote peace between Dimeman and 1985fan
The sad thing is my original argument had nothing to do with Romo being elite or not. My point, also realized by my young daughter, is that only"haters" could blame a QB for being outscored 51 -48.
Since there is no entrance exam required to get on these boards, you will find a few others who agree with you, but we both know how the great majority would view the Romo/defense blame game.
<< <i>
<< <i>Peyton has a ring. Favre has one, too. Unless they give out rings for playoff victories, Tony doesn't.
So that I understand, the ring is the only true measurement that counts? Thats got to be great news for Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler etc. Yeah, thanks for clearing everything up for me. >>
Not sure which thread you've been reading, but we're talking about quarterbacks that are perceived to be elite based on their bodies of work. Rypien, Dilfer, Williams, and Hostetler are irrelevant in the context of this discussion, unless you'd personally like to throw them in as well. Hopefully you won't, but seeing as you're siding with the obtuse one, one never knows. >>
Either playoff wins make you elite (which is why you say Romo isn't), or it doesn't. Dan Fouts won 3 playoff games in his career, lost 4, and never won a super bowl. Does that mean he's not elite? Dan Marino 8-10 and no ring. Is he elite?
This entire argument about trying to equate playoff/super bowl wins and a level of eliteness is ridiculous and arbitrary, which is exactly why those lacking the ability to understand football use it. They can twist the argument to whatever line of reasoning they want it to mean, without ONCE realizing that playoff wins are a function of the team!
<< <i>This thread is discussing the topic of "elite" QB's and whether Romo is or is not one.
"Elite" is a very vague term, but in my view it refers to the type of athlete who not only wants the ball in crunch time (i.e., playoffs or a game that needs to be won to make the playoffs) but who demonstrates that he (or she) has that special something that allows him (or her) to perform and their best and actually deliver a victory. Some athletes who want the ball in crunch time (which is admirable) can not deliver in crunch time. A few of these types of athletes can and do deliver in crunch time. Michael Jordan is an example of just such an athlete.
As for Tony Romo, he may want the ball in crunch time, but he has not yet demonstrated that he can deliver in crunch time. He may reach that level before his career is over, but it has not happened yet. Hopefully he will get there, if only to promote peace between Dimeman and 1985fan
Dan Marino was a superior QB to Troy Aikman.
Aikman was part of three championship teams. Marino zero.
So where are you drawing the body of work line, compared to that of showing your definition of being able to deliver in 'the big moments'?
Brett Favre has one ring, Terry Bradshaw has four. Favre was superior.
Bradshaw(along with Aikman) are probably the most overrated QB's of all time who had the best supporting casts of all-time(neither of whom could have winning records or elite QB performances when they did NOT have those superior supporting casts).
Where are you drawing the body of work with the championships?
Someone claimed that Romo was like the 20th best QB in the league right now. Where exactly are you guys who diminish him, rank him among today's active QB's??
A little head start for you...
How many active QB's have won rings?
How many have higher QB performances or rating?
How many have MORE INT?
How many have more/less 4th quarter comebacks?
How many have better w/l records?
How many have glorious playoff records?
PS. If you guys say since a guy has won a ring, that he has 'proven' he could step up in a big game(based on ONE instance), then Romo has also PROVEN that he could step up and win a big game, because he has won a playoff game.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
Game just starting.
So who will be the hero and who will be the lousy bum tonight?
Anyone care to predict the final score and stats, including the stats of Romo and Brees [I think I spelled his last name correctly].
Can't wait to hear from Dimeman, 1985fan and others who have posted to this thread.
Me thinks that with an exciting game with heroics or errors by one or both quarterbacks the thread count will quickly top 300
No matter how well Romo plays, if Dallas doesn't win, dimeman will blame Romo for the loss.
Saints defense is better than most give it credit for, I think they're top 10 statwise.
I'll go with 27-21 score, with Dallas winning.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
I'm just bummed that I didn't lay down my entire bankroll on it
<< <i>I'll make some predictions:
I'll go with 27-21 score, with Dallas winning. >>
I always look forward to this. Nice pick, charlatan!
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
<< <i>
<< <i>I'll make some predictions:
I'll go with 27-21 score, with Dallas winning. >>
I always look forward to this. Nice pick, charlatan! >>
Where was your pick? Oh that's right, you don't have the stones to make picks, you just sit back and pick apart others who do. I think this image exemplified you *perfectly*:
Maybe at some point, after you start showing some courage, and, you know, actually MAKE a pick, I'll see you differently. But then you'd never do something that could possibly be picked apart, so you sit, HIDING, not making a pick, like a coward.
<< <i>No NFL QB can run a momentum-killing three and out like our man Tony! >>
No defense is as awful as the Cowboys', you mean.
<< <i>Where was your pick? Oh that's right, you don't have the stones to make picks, you just sit back and pick apart others who do. I think this image exemplified you *perfectly* >>
Those meds you incessantly dish out sure do have a vile taste, don't they? To answer your question, it's where billwaltonsbeard's pick was. Unlike you, I'm not here to impress. Tell you what, though. Select the game of your choice this coming week and I'll appease you, alt boy.
For your sake, I just hope your prognostication "skills" don't leave this forum. You've proven time and again how little you know about sports, and when you really get brazen it just never ends well for you.
Perhaps it's time for you to head back over to the Redskins thread and tell yankeeno7 what a fool he is. Oh, that's right, you've been nowhere to be found ever since someone with true perspective entered the fray and blew holes in your interminable rants. Probably the wisest thing you've done thus far, C.J. Romo.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
<< <i>
Those meds you incessantly dish out sure do have a vile taste, don't they? To answer your question, it's where billwaltonsbeard's pick was. Unlike you, I'm not here to impress. Tell you what, though. Select the game of your choice this coming week and I'll appease you, alt boy. >>
You're not here to impress, and you haven't made a single pick all year. Hilarious. You bash others for making selections, yet offer none of your own. Even worse? You bring up playoff wins in this thread as if that somehow is a measure of a QB. Good lord you really aren't good at this thing called understanding team sports are you? But then, when you're Captain Hindsight, you're not in the business of making predictions.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
<< <i>
<< <i>No NFL QB can run a momentum-killing three and out like our man Tony! >>
No defense is as awful as the Cowboys', you mean. >>
The Saints offense can make most NFL teams look pretty bad.
But dude, come on.......PULL YOUR HEAD OUT!!!! It wasn't Demarcus Ware and Sean Lee making horrible passes behind or at the feet of his receivers.
I imagine they were pretty tired.....in more ways than one. But the offense was well rested!
Gave up a lot? Yeah, if "a lot" means an all time NFL record first downs to an opposing team. More than the great Chargers offenses of the late 70's, the Dolphins of the mid 80's, and the Colts or Patriots of the last decade.
Romo's numbers were awful last night, but awful would have been a huge improvement for the Defense.
You want to blame "3 and out Tony"? Maybe if the Defense could get a 3 and out early in a drive they wouldn't be so tired.
To summarize the game, Romo was terrible and the Cowboys Defense was the only thing more terrible.
<< <i>Sure the defense gave up a LOT.......But they were on the field most of the time thanks to 3 and out Tony!!!!
I imagine they were pretty tired.....in more ways than one. But the offense was well rested!
It's pretty pathetic for a Cowboys fan to take delight in one of their own players struggling. PATHETIC!
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN.
A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner.
DIMEMAN finds a way to blame every loss on Romo and I think even blame some of their wins on Romo. And yet refuses to look elsewhere (namely defense).
Worst part is you get the feeling he takes more joy in being able to come on here and blame Romo for a loss, then he does to silently enjoy the Cowboys' victories.
<< <i> Cowboys fan
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN.
>>
True, true.
<< <i>A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner. >>
Well, you're right, he's definitely not a real fan.
<< <i>DIMEMAN finds a way to blame every loss on Romo and I think even blame some of their wins on Romo. And yet refuses to look elsewhere (namely defense).
Worst part is you get the feeling he takes more joy in being able to come on here and blame Romo for a loss, then he does to silently enjoy the Cowboys' victories. >>
Absolutely he does. It's pretty pathetic he gets more joy in watching Romo fail than in a Cowboys win. Even when he drove the team down to beat the Vikings in the final two minutes, he was trying to blame Romo for 'almost' losing the game!
<< <i> Cowboys fan
Those 2 words should never be used in a sentence when talking about DIMEMAN.
A true fan should be able to objectively look at a game and dole out proper blame/credit to its rightful owner.
>>
Any real Cowboys fan should be offended by dimeman calling himself a Cowboys fan.
If you want to cast blame, it falls in the same 2 places it always does, Jerry Jones and Garrett. Where would this team be with Rob Ryan as DC and anyone other than Garrett as head coach? For the sake of the Cowboys fans, I hope they finish at 7-9 and the Eagles win the division at 8-8 and maybe, just maybe, Garrett gets fired.
Last night's game when they are down 42 - 17 with about 11 minutes to play, he runs the ball?????? Was he killing the clock to keep the Saints from scoring more? I know that is a difficult deficit to overcome in that amount of time, but it is not impossible. And if he felt it was impossible, why keep your starting QB on the field? Only DIMEMAN would do something like that (in hopes of him getting injured so the secret weapon Kyle Orton could come off the bench)
Either try to win the freakin game or get out alive to fight another day.
That defense is offensive. NFC East, yikes.
I proposed a trade of top 12 Qb's………….Romo for Cutler. Both cities seem to hate their current Qb's but yet there are 20 teams that would rather be in their place/ There are not enough good Qb's to go around.
Romo is far from elite but is well above average in today's NFL talent wise.
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>In an effort of finding common ground can we at least all agree that the Cowboys suck?
That defense is offensive. NFC East, yikes.
I proposed a trade of top 12 Qb's………….Romo for Cutler. Both cities seem to hate their current Qb's but yet there are 20 teams that would rather be in their place/ There are not enough good Qb's to go around.
Romo is far from elite but is well above average in today's NFL talent wise.
MJ >>
Cowboys don't suck. Defense is horrible (see Rob Ryan comments earlier in thread). Offense has to be in the top 2 or 3 in the NFL in pure talent just like they are every year. If a team with that much perennial talent continues to be mediocre, it all falls back on coaching. No other reason.
Cutler has always been garbage. Every now and then he has a game where you see what he could be if he played his best every game.
If you put any other QB in the league, with the exception of Peyton or Brady, into the Cowboys offense with Garrett calling the plays any time in the last 3 years at best the Cowboys might win 1 extra game a season. Even if Peyton was the Cowboys QB this season they may only win one extra game. Can not give up 4+ TDs almost every game and expect to win.
Just because I call it like it is on Romo DOES NOT have ANYTHING to do with me being a fan!!!
So BACKOFF.......IDIOTS!!!!
Dallas' primary issue, which has been noted, is Jerry Jones. He lucked out with his Super Bowl wins, and since then, his teams have been a mess. His ego simply will not allow him to hire a GM that knows personnel, and his 'solution' is to continue to throw good money after bad chasing talent. Since he doesn't know how to evaluate talent, this problem only escalates.
Those fans who want to blame Romo simply are unwilling or unable to process the data that is readily available and instead want to take a shortcut.