Tony Romo

[Phurfur 70]

again, last place in 2 of 3 years for the best QB in the NFC East?

 

 

I think we are rating them on where they stand today. Eli was not the best QB last year but he sure is today.

[NewbieJr 541]

10-6 ain't a b1tch-slap, more like a cripple fight against a team that knew before kickoff they'd secured a first-round bye -- and that they couldn't lock up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. So the stakes were pretty low. And they played like it.

...and it was only 28 yards. Along with 4 sacks, 1 fumble lost. I mean, when the OTHER guys turn the ball over five times, fail to score a TD, and the best you can do is 200 yards passing and 1 TD? Damn. - I guess grasp for whatever hope you can find, but them's David Carr kind of numbers.

If you recall, it would have been 17-6 had Westbrook not laid down on one. That game was an ass-whoopin', whether you want to admit it or not.

[jgcrawfish 232]

Romo is 27 years old. Eli Manning is 26. Jason Campbell is 26.

 

Romo has one less year of shelf life than the other two (if they all play to the same age), so the amount of seasons each one has played is irrelevant when you're trying to predict who will be better in the long run.

 

In fact, since Romo is older than the other two, he should already have the experience based on age. With that said, the upside would firmly be in the hands of Manning, since he has more seasons as a starter, more playoff experience, and a SB appearance to put under his belt.

 

Until Romo wins some playoff games, he's below Eli and McNabb in my "GM" book. At this point, names like Rivers, Garrard, Brees, Grossman, Delhomme, and a few others have accomplished more than Romo has.

[Phurfur 70]

If you recall, it would have been 17-6 had Westbrook not laid down on one. That game was an ass-whoopin', whether you want to admit it or not.

 

 

You saw the same game I did, I wonder what game they were watching?

[surferskin 30]

Or how about an NFC Championship and SB appearance in one of the past 4 years.

 

Besides Eli, can anyone else in the division say that?

 

See, anyone can play with sample size.

a sample size is not something that happened 4 years ago but thanks for playing.

[Gepetto 1,297]

This thread should have the title: Football Analysis For Dummies

[surferskin 30]

I think we are rating them on where they stand today. Eli was not the best QB last year but he sure is today.

i'm not talking about Eli, i'm just referring to people calling mcnafro the best QB in the NFC East.

[Phurfur 70]

i'm not talking about Eli, i'm just referring to people calling mcnafro the best QB in the NFC East.

 

 

I have him at #2.

[wiffleball 4,788]

Or how about an NFC Championship and SB appearance in one of the past 4 years.

 

Besides Eli, can anyone else in the division say that?

 

See, anyone can play with sample size.

 

So, an NFC Championship and a SB appearance makes you the best QB in your Division?

 

Gotcha.

 

Rex Grossman > Brett Favre.

[Cruzer 1,995]

If you recall, it would have been 17-6 had Westbrook not laid down on one. That game was an ass-whoopin', whether you want to admit it or not.

dallas was terribly sloppy, and did get beat. but i'd hardly call that victory an ass-whipping. romo gave the birds 3 picks and you still couldn't score more than a possible 17. mcnabb's 78.1 qb rating for the game is rather vanilla to poor in fact. an ass-whipping was what dallas did to philly earlier in the year.

[jgcrawfish 232]

So, an NFC Championship and a SB appearance makes you the best QB in your Division?

 

Gotcha.

 

Rex Grossman > Brett Favre.

 

Hmmm...me thinks you may have forgotten a few other moment of Favrereerrereeere's career...

[The Hood 9]

10-6 ain't a b1tch-slap, more like a cripple fight against a team that knew before kickoff they'd secured a first-round bye -- and that they couldn't lock up home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. So the stakes were pretty low. And they played like it.

 

 

...and it was only 28 yards. Along with 4 sacks, 1 fumble lost. I mean, when the OTHER guys turn the ball over five times, fail to score a TD, and the best you can do is 200 yards passing and 1 TD? Damn. - I guess grasp for whatever hope you can find, but them's David Carr kind of numbers.

 

200 yds and a TD was about an average game for Garcia with the Eagles last year. Why does it make him great yet shows why McNabb sucks?

[NewbieJr 541]

200 yds and a TD was about an average game for Garcia with the Eagles last year. Why does it make him great yet shows why McNabb sucks?

Because McNabb is black and because everyone loves the backup quarterback.

[Cruzer 1,995]

You know you are full of it, seasons in the league are what matters.

wow, you really are out there. this zoomed past common sense at warp speed. seasons in the league is "nice" but it doesn't hold a candle to playing experience. yes romo has been in the league one more year than eli, but what did that get him? he didn't get to play in real games, he didn't get to work with the first team in practice, what he got was a clip board. like i mentioned, eli has almost a 2 full year advantage over romo in playing time as a starter - that's huge.

 

hat did Romo do his first 3 1/2 years, nothing, no he was gaining experience.

gaining it where and how? again, not only was he not woking with the first unit in practice - he was running scout team for the first defense for goodness sakes. u mean that kind of experience? or maybe you mean the kind you and i get from watching the game on t.v., except he has a better seat up front on the sideline.

 

dallas was looking for a QB and he couldn't cut it. It is not like he was playing behind John Elway. Rookie QBs that play right away get some slack to gain experience, if you get that experience on the bench for 3 1/2 years you should be ready.

i think this says more to the stubborness of bill parcells than romo. maybe you know of some teams where the qb's decides who starts, but not in dallas - tuna made that call. now he has his chance, and i'd say he's making a pretty good run with it.

 

What Dallas has is another Danny White, only Romo can't punt.

wonderful, danny white was a very good qb and was one "the catch" away from going to the SB. but i see what you're saying, we need a qb like carson palmer, drew brees, donovan mcnabb, matt hasselbeck - or hell, even a dan marino or dan fouts if we're ever going to win another SB in dallas. cuz those guys have like what, 15 titles among them.........?

[wiffleball 4,788]

200 yds and a TD was about an average game for Garcia with the Eagles last year. Why does it make him great yet shows why McNabb sucks?

 

I think the .500 record that McNabb put up vs. the 6 game winning streak into the playoffs that Garcia put up is all the answer you need.

[Cruzer 1,995]

In fact, since Romo is older than the other two, he should already have the experience based on age. With that said, the upside would firmly be in the hands of Manning, since he has more seasons as a starter, more playoff experience, and a SB appearance to put under his belt.

exactly, and the one and only reason is bcoz of playing experience.

 

there are guys on the pga tour who are older than tiger woods, but they do not have the experience he has. using this argument, they should be more ready to win bcoz they "should" have more experience.

[wiffleball 4,788]

Because McNabb is black and because everyone loves the backup quarterback.

 

Excellent use of the race card - the ultimate white flag.

 

 

In Philly's case, everyone loves the backup QB because in TWO seperate playoff years, Back up QB's (including back-ups to the back-up) have salvaged a .500 or below season from Mcnabb's incompentent hands and gone on ginormous winning streaks. - Playoff years that wouldn't have happened if McCripple weren't as delicate as a 6 y.o. girl with rheumatioid arthritis.

Funny how McWorthless keeps whining about his recievers (and Reid keeps changing them for him), his lack of "playmakers" - Yet with two different teams and at least 3 different backup QB's, the back-up QB and his worthless, untalented WR's and their total lack of "playmakers" seems to find a way to win against teams that McNabb-led teams (with the same personnel) can't.

 

No wonder they love the backups in Philly.

[The Next Generation 10]

I think the .500 record that McNabb put up vs. the 6 game winning streak into the playoffs that Garcia put up is all the answer you need.

 

I think the rest of the team stepped-up and the gameplan was simplified to Garcia's strengths. Much like what happened at the end of this season for the Redskins w/Collins.

[wiffleball 4,788]

I think the rest of the team stepped-up and the gameplan was simplified to Garcia's strengths. Much like what happened at the end of this season for the Redskins w/Collins.

 

So, McLeadership can't get his own team to "step up" for him, but some journeyman QB, they'll play for? Stellar leadership there.

 

And, how do you know the gameplan wasn't limited by McNabb's weaknesses??

 

Gotta love the McNabb apologists. You give the same team to two QB's. One goes .500, the other 1.000 - and it's everything BUT McNabb's fault.

[NewbieJr 541]

For some reason, it's sexy to be down on Mcnabb these days. I guess all the NFC championship games and the Super Bowl appearences never happened. Same goes with the Pro Bowl appearences.

The reason Dallas killed Philly early on is because McNabb was 7 months removed from major knee surgery. It's no secret that McNabb doesn't have laser precision. His strengths are a strong arm, nice use of his outlet guys, and his ability to avoid the pass rush and tuck the ball and gain positive yardage with his feet.

Take away the legs, and his average passing skills are not enough to make him a winning NFL quarterback. That was never a mystery to anyone who knew anything about McNabb or the Eagles. I don't think any reasonable Philly fan ever claimed McNabb was the same passer that Brady or Manning are.

As his knee got better, he became more effective. Again, no big surprise.

 

As Eli and Romo improve (and Campbell) it seems like there are four very decent QBs in the division. But anyone who thinks that a healthy McNabb isn't at the level of the others is fooling themselves.

[wiffleball 4,788]

I guess all the NFC championship games and the Super Bowl appearences never happened.

 

That would be Super Bowl appearnce. Singular. And, half the teams in the NFC have managed that same feat in the past 8 years. - Not exactly solid criterion in the languishing NFC of the 21st century.

[NewbieJr 541]

That would be Super Bowl appearnce. Singular. And, half the teams in the NFC have managed that same feat in the past 8 years. - Not exactly solid criterion in the languishing NFC of the 21st century.

Care to give me the playoff win total of Romo vs. McNabb?

[Pimptaddy 0]

Romo is tied with Eli now for the best QB in the division. If Eli wins the title this year, then I will be forced to place him ahead of Romo. I will still take Romo over Eli any day of the week now. McNabb is not his old self and is third best. Whatever scrub the Deadskins are rolling out is 4th.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

So, an NFC Championship and a SB appearance makes you the best QB in your Division?

 

Gotcha.

 

Rex Grossman > Brett Favre.

 

Of course not, jackazz. You chose a three year sample period why, because you hate McNabb. It's real easy to select a sample size to fit your arguement, yet when someone else chooses a larger sample size, your reply is that garbage above?

 

Let the adults talk now. Go take a walk, Junior.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

That would be Super Bowl appearnce. Singular. And, half the teams in the NFC have managed that same feat in the past 8 years. - Not exactly solid criterion in the languishing NFC of the 21st century.

 

But the initial discussion had to do with the NFC EAST, you focking moron. If you want to broaden the discussion, start your own focking thread.

[Pimptaddy 0]

Just two years ago it would have been easy to pick the best QB in the NFC East. It was McNabb! However, McNabb has fallen off since then and is now third.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

a sample size is not something that happened 4 years ago but thanks for playing.

 

But a sample size would be a four year period, just like a three year period would be another instance of a sample size.

 

Right back at ya, Poncho.

[Pimptaddy 0]

Care to give me the playoff win total of Romo vs. McNabb?

 

 

Care to give me the total times each guy has thrown up on the field?

Care to list the number of times each QB has gotten tired in big games?

[The Next Generation 10]

So, McLeadership can't get his own team to "step up" for him, but some journeyman QB, they'll play for? Stellar leadership there.

 

And, how do you know the gameplan wasn't limited by McNabb's weaknesses??

 

Gotta love the McNabb apologists. You give the same team to two QB's. One goes .500, the other 1.000 - and it's everything BUT McNabb's fault.

 

Because they pass much more when McNabb is the QB than they do when the backups are in there. I don't know why, but they do. I think that's one of Reid's biggest failings.

 

Also, I agree with you that Garcia was a better team leader than McNabb but he's NOT a better QB skill-wise.

[NewbieJr 541]

Care to give me the total times each guy has thrown up on the field?

Care to list the number of times each QB has gotten tired in big games?

You got to get to the big games in order to get tired and throw up in them. Therefore, Romo still has a clean slate.

 

Now, if you want to talk about the not-quite-big game that leads to the big games, Romo's two-year-in-a-row choking streak would enter the discussion.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

Until Romo wins some playoff games, he's below Eli and McNabb in my "GM" book. At this point, names like Rivers, Garrard, Brees, Grossman, Delhomme, and a few others have accomplished more than Romo has.

 

I agree. As an Eagle's fan, I happen to think that both Romo and Campbell have alot of upside. Eli has come a long way in a short amount of time, however he's consistency to date has been inconsistency. I like the way both Romo and Campbell play the game.

 

Romo has shown to be a great QB in the first half of a season, mediocre in the last half of a season, and "less than stellar" in the playoffs.

 

Is anyone saying that Romo is always gonna fail? No. But can one really say that he will improve and get over that hump? Who knows, but one can insinuate he will based on a two year career and the numbers he's put up in each year.

 

Fans and media have annointed him a superstar QB. But let's be real; there's a reason why he went to the college that he did, there's a reason why he was drafted where he was, and there's a reason why he didn't get to start an NFL game until he was 26 years old.

 

Let's see if he progresses in 2008 before making any bold predictions.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

Care to give me the total times each guy has thrown up on the field?

Care to list the number of times each QB has gotten tired in big games?

 

It's the same number of times Tony Romo's fumbled the snap on a field goal attempt that lost his team the game.

 

Don't bring a knife to a gunfight, kid.

[GhostofMeanMachine99 1]

So, McLeadership can't get his own team to "step up" for him, but some journeyman QB, they'll play for? Stellar leadership there.

 

And, how do you know the gameplan wasn't limited by McNabb's weaknesses??

 

Gotta love the McNabb apologists. You give the same team to two QB's. One goes .500, the other 1.000 - and it's everything BUT McNabb's fault.

 

I'm gonna guess when Reid says he didn't change the gameplan for McNabb, that may have been a giveaway. Not sure.

 

Who won every game while being an Eagle?

 

Gotta love the McNabb haters because they have nothing better to do.

[jgcrawfish 232]

I agree. As an Eagle's fan, I happen to think that both Romo and Campbell have alot of upside. Eli has come a long way in a short amount of time, however he's consistency to date has been inconsistency. I like the way both Romo and Campbell play the game.

 

Romo has shown to be a great QB in the first half of a season, mediocre in the last half of a season, and "less than stellar" in the playoffs.

 

Is anyone saying that Romo is always gonna fail? No. But can one really say that he will improve and get over that hump? Who knows, but one can insinuate he will based on a two year career and the numbers he's put up in each year.

 

Fans and media have annointed him a superstar QB. But let's be real; there's a reason why he went to the college that he did, there's a reason why he was drafted where he was, and there's a reason why he didn't get to start an NFL game until he was 26 years old.

 

Let's see if he progresses in 2008 before making any bold predictions.

 

Agree and well put. I think Dallas fans and the media have been way too quick to anoint him as the next great QB. I'm a Steelers fan and I don't even pretend to put Ben into that category. In fact, I believe the Steelers won a bit in spite of the way Ben played. However, I don't believe you can base a QB's future on where he went to college nor necessarily what he did there. I do however agree the clearer indicator is the fact that he couldn't crack what was obviously a poor QB position on the Cowboys for 3 yrs. He has some tendencies to freelance and weaknesses that the greatness of his receives, Witten and TO in particular, cover up. And I think that when the pressure gets cranked up, well, the neckline of his jersey seems to get a bit too tight for his comfort. Admittedly, the spot light in Dallas is very bright and very hot. For all his incredible regular season success, even his playoff wins, Peyton didn't get the monkey off his back until he won the superbowl, and in fact if he doesn't get there again, it will probably considered a fluke. Romo hasn't even won a playoff game and cost the Cowboys last year a gimme against Seattle, and didn't particularly pick the team up on his shoulders this year. He's the 1st QB I'd pick for my FF team from that division, but the 3rd one I'd pick right now if I had to win an important game in real life.

[Bert 1,128]

Well philly fans lets use the line ya'll like to throw out when someone talks about superbowl rings. Quit living in the past. McNabb hasn't done anything the last three years and his team has finished last in their division 2 out of 3 years with him as a starter.

[NewbieJr 541]

The media desperately wants Romo to be a great quarterback. He may even end up getting there someday, but having a few good games in September and October hardly qualify you as a great QB. The public is being force-fed Tony Romo.

[wiffleball 4,788]

Look, all kidding aside, the reality is this:

 

Mcnabb can sit back there and throw the ball 50 times a game and rack up 300 yards pretty easily. Hell, we saw Carson Palmer do that all year long.

 

The real difference in the whole McNabb's failure vs. Garcia's sucess? Isn't about yards, isn't about TD's, and it sure as hell isn't about race. That's just focking stupid.

 

The reality is, if you want to run the West Coast Offense (or pretty much any, but esp WCO), ANY football guy will tell you the KEY to success in the WCO is accuracy. If you look at the playoff teams, virtually every one of them has QB's with .60+ %'s. Eli's the exception, but if you look at his late & post-season numbers, you'll see that he's top 2 in accuracy - with resultant success.

 

If you look at McNabb, the only year they went to the SB, was his best year in terms of completion percentage. That's no coincidence. With some exceptions*, when you look at McNabb's wins this year and last, when his completion percentage is good (.60+), they win. When his percentage sucks (.500 or below), they lose.

 

When Mcnabb went on that craptacular 1-4 run last year, he was completing around just 53% of his passes. In Garcia's 5 wins, he had three games over 65%. WCO isn't about long ball, but a series of short, ACCURATE passes to set up the run. If you find yourself at 2 or 3rd and 10 because you botch half your passes, you can't set up the run.

 

The numbers don't lie. Why did they change the game plan with Garcia? Because they could. Garcia's much better suited for the O that Philly wants to run given their personnel. (Giants can get away with it because they have horses in the backfield). Anybody who watches McNabb will tell you the numbers don't lie either; McNabb - (for some wierd reason - maybe, injury, fear of INT's?) throws at WR's shins. He's got the lowest strike zone in the league. That leads to a low % - and to more losses than wins.

 

The good news is, McNabb's numbers seemed to be trending up toward the end of the season. And, when that happens, wins tend to happen.

 

 

 

 

* Hell, they beat the 'fins with a 27% percentage, but it WAS the 'fins....

[wiffleball 4,788]

Of course not, jackazz. You chose a three year sample period why, because you hate McNabb. It's real easy to select a sample size to fit your arguement, yet when someone else chooses a larger sample size, your reply is that garbage above?

 

Let the adults talk now. Go take a walk, Junior.

 

Uh, sporto? I didn't choose the sample period. I know it's hard to keep track, but do try....

[Me_2006 14]

Maybe the first 3/4's of the season. Down the stretch I'd go with BJ.

C'mon, this was a softball. Please tell me someone knocked it out of the park.

[Jwood 0]

Not sure where all the Romo choke talk is coming from.

 

He bobbled a slick ball against Seattle and damn near ended up running it in for a TD. As a matter of fact, didn't they change the rules seperating kicking balls from regular balls after that?

 

What did he do to choke against the Giants? He made 1 bad throw to TO that I saw. Fasano dropped a TD pass, Crayton dropped what would have been a huge gain and then stopped running on another pass that would have been a TD. He didn't throw but one interception and that was at the very tail end of the game.

 

Granted it wasn't one of his best games, but it sure as hell wasn't one of his worst. Not even close.

 

That loss was more the WR's and O-lines fault that Romo's fault.