PDA

View Full Version : MMQB: Tony Romo is not the answer in Denver



VonDoom
12-29-2016, 06:06 PM
Good piece today talking about a lot of the same stuff we've been talking about lately. Most articles this year failed to mention our offensive line woes but this hits it right on the head, IMO:


My take: It’s time for John Elway to open the checkbook. Not for another short-term rental at quarterback; Tony Romo (a.k.a. Peyton Manning Lite) isn’t the answer. If the Broncos are in the business of sustained success like I think they are, they need to get serious about the offensive line. The issues that derailed the title defense—for a team that may very well possess the best defense to ever miss the playoffs—have been brewing for some time now, and they won’t be addressed by Romo, the dethroned starter in Dallas who is often linked these days to John Elway’s Broncos, and who’ll be 37 next season. Simply put: While the Broncos have been deploying offensive line stopgaps, their AFC West opponents have been developing defensive line studs.


To say Denver’s running game has been anemic would be generous; the Broncos have managed 3.6 yards per attempt, 28th best in the league, and failed to eclipse 100 yards rushing in nine games. Since 2000, six out of 32 rookie starters have managed an 85-plus passer rating. Only one of them did it without a top-15 rushing offense: Marcus Mariota in 2015. Carson Palmer, Derek Carr, Joe Flacco and Andy Dalton each had poorer seasons statistically in their first seasons as starters, and each had a better running game than the Broncos do right now. Three weeks ago the Broncos rushed for 18 yards against the Titans. Two weeks ago Denver managed 58 rushing yards at home versus New England. And in the eliminating loss? Sixty-three rushing yards against the Chiefs in a 33-10 embarrassment.Granted, Siemian is not a rookie, but given his status as a first-time starter and a 2015 seventh-rounder, it would be an oversight and a symptom of unrealistic franchise expectations to label his 2016 performance a failure.

I’m of the unpopular opinion that the circumstances on the entire offensive side, dire as they became, preclude judgment on Siemian and his 83.9 passer rating in 2015. And I think the Broncos brain trust will agree when they sit down and look at the big picture.



What the Broncos are looking for, at this stage in John Elway’s unprecedented career as the only man to win the Super Bowl MVP as a player and the Super Bowl as an executive, is longevity. A free-agent quarterback on his last contract doesn’t fulfill that aspiration, and I have serious doubts that Elway would even consider testing his luck again at the game’s most important position, after successfully walking the tightrope once with an aging quarterback coming off significant injury. If I’m prognosticating, Elway and coach Gary Kubiak will do three things this offseason:

• Inject new life into the OL room by replacing Barone as offensive line coach.

• Mend the egos of a defense that allowed the fewest passing yards in the NFL and the second-fewest yards per drive.

• Build an offensive line through the draft, trade and free agency that will allow whoever wins next summer’s quarterback competition—be it Siemian or 2016 first-rounder Paxton Lynch—to play up to his full potential, and let the rest of the very talented Broncos play up to theirs.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/12/27/denver-broncos-quarterback-tony-romo-trevor-siemian-offensive-line

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
12-29-2016, 07:42 PM
I like it.

dogfish
12-29-2016, 08:56 PM
i have it on good authority that's it's overly simplistic and incorrect to place the bulk of the blame for our offensive woes on the line. . .

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
12-29-2016, 09:14 PM
i have it on good authority that's it's overly simplistic and incorrect to place the bulk of the blame for our offensive woes on the line. . .

Don't do it DOG

King87
12-29-2016, 09:18 PM
i have it on good authority that's it's overly simplistic and incorrect to place the bulk of the blame for our offensive woes on the line. . .


I love when someone takes what I said and misapplies it. It's overly simplistic to take the line's shitty play and use it to give everyone else a pass. It's over simplistic to just go 'derp, can't criticize HC/OC or QB bcuz line iz bad'.


I hate you forever.

dogfish
12-29-2016, 10:03 PM
I love when someone takes what I said and misapplies it. It's overly simplistic to take the line's shitty play and use it to give everyone else a pass. It's over simplistic to just go 'derp, can't criticize HC/OC or QB bcuz line iz bad'.


I hate you forever.

gotcha. . . :D

dogfish
12-29-2016, 10:04 PM
Don't do it DOG

some days, you have to poke the bear. . .

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
12-29-2016, 10:13 PM
some days, you have to poke the bear. . .

I was gonna say, "don't poke the gorilla " but what you said works. 😆

Denver Native (Carol)
12-29-2016, 10:29 PM
Good article, but I don't agree with the following:

• Inject new life into the OL room by replacing Barone as offensive line coach.

IMO, the best NFL OL coach could not have fixed this OL.

NightTerror218
12-29-2016, 10:58 PM
Good article, but I don't agree with the following:

• Inject new life into the OL room by replacing Barone as offensive line coach.

IMO, the best NFL OL coach could not have fixed this OL.

But one problem with them was not talent but such poor execution all around. Some of the players on OL should not be in the NFL but others like garcia have potential. That comes to coach. Too many times they would block and miss a guy who came down the middle on poor blocking assignments.

underrated29
12-29-2016, 11:03 PM
It starts with RT. We must hit that player out of the park!

King87
12-29-2016, 11:38 PM
some days, you have to poke the bear. . .

That couch is getting a chili shit.

Hawgdriver
12-30-2016, 03:59 AM
I'd rather see Romo under center than what we have, but QB is a cap-adjusted strength of the roster as currently configured. Take what is paid to Ware, Okung, and Stephenson, and figure out a way to get 8-10 dudes who can consistently execute running plays while preserving the passing threat with run personnel.

gregbroncs
12-30-2016, 09:41 AM
I'd rather see Romo under center than what we have, but QB is a cap-adjusted strength of the roster as currently configured. Take what is paid to Ware, Okung, and Stephenson, and figure out a way to get 8-10 dudes who can consistently execute running plays while preserving the passing threat with run personnel.I wouldn't. Romo does not win when it counts. I'd rather have the potential of a good QB than a guy who's always been overrated and is coming off of a series of injuries. Romo does nothing to fix our team.

underrated29
12-30-2016, 09:50 AM
I'd take romo if he was cheap enough. You don't think romo can get the team to score 3 times? And in the RZ at least another time or two a game? That's all we need. We held most teams to 20 or less points.....plus, romo actually getting first down means the d won't play an entire game and be rested which means they'll play better, more turnover and even less scoring against them.


Without a RT it won't matter though.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 09:55 AM
"Tony Romo is not the answer"

I can't put enough emphasis on "Welll.....DUUUUUUUHHHH!!!"

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 09:57 AM
Good article, but I don't agree with the following:

• Inject new life into the OL room by replacing Barone as offensive line coach.

IMO, the best NFL OL coach could not have fixed this OL.

I whole heartedly disagree...Even complete scrubs should have had some cohesion after playing together for 13 games...Look at the patriots, I'm sure the same could have been said about their line that it was just untalented, ect... They ditched their o-line coach, brought in someone who knew how to do his job and suddenly they block like pros.

Let's not forget how bad Thomas was at blocking with Barone as his coach....That wasn't 100 percent Thomas. He sucks as a line coach, plain and freaking simple.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 09:59 AM
i have it on good authority that's it's overly simplistic and incorrect to place the bulk of the blame for our offensive woes on the line. . .

I've heard that our woes start with the QB, so I guess that's who we should replace first :D

gregbroncs
12-30-2016, 10:05 AM
I'd take romo if he was cheap enough. You don't think romo can get the team to score 3 times? And in the RZ at least another time or two a game? That's all we need. We held most teams to 20 or less points.....plus, romo actually getting first down means the d won't play an entire game and be rested which means they'll play better, more turnover and even less scoring against them.


Without a RT it won't matter though.No I don't think Romo could have done any better than Simien did with a horrible line and no running game. In fact I fully believe that Romo behind this line throws 20 picks this year for the Broncos. He played behind one of the best lines in football in Dallas and still threw horrible picks at bad times when under pressure.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 10:20 AM
No I don't think Romo could have done any better than Simien did with a horrible line and no running game. In fact I fully believe that Romo behind this line throws 20 picks this year for the Broncos. He played behind one of the best lines in football in Dallas and still threw horrible picks at bad times when under pressure.

People's love affair with Romo honestly confuses me. It's not grounded in any kind of logical thought. He's been mediocre and completely unclutch behind one of the best lines and running games in football. He's also been the most injury prone QB in the game of football...

Yet somehow, putting him behind the worst line in the NFL with no running game, he's just going to suddenly stay healthy and be a clutch player. Coming to Denver will completely break established tendencies? That's not logical.

underrated29
12-30-2016, 11:46 AM
No I don't think Romo could have done any better than Simien did with a horrible line and no running game. In fact I fully believe that Romo behind this line throws 20 picks this year for the Broncos. He played behind one of the best lines in football in Dallas and still threw horrible picks at bad times when under pressure.


People's love affair with Romo honestly confuses me. It's not grounded in any kind of logical thought. He's been mediocre and completely unclutch behind one of the best lines and running games in football. He's also been the most injury prone QB in the game of football...

Yet somehow, putting him behind the worst line in the NFL with no running game, he's just going to suddenly stay healthy and be a clutch player. Coming to Denver will completely break established tendencies? That's not logical.


He probably would throw 20 picks and he did throw untimely interceptions. Thats romo. He also throws for tons of yards and tds. He has only had the elite Oline for 2 years now, this is not like he has had the best line in football his whole career....The career you know that has almost HOF numbers. Ya. Romo is that good. Siemian will likely never ever be that good and we can only Pray to everything holy that Lynch will be as good.

It is actually insanely logical to think one of the better QBs in this era would improve your team. Especially since he plays the most important position in football. Once again, the only major change on our team from Winning it all, to missing the playoffs was QB. We actually upgraded RT with DS from Schofield....And yet our offense is even worse! Why would we not want to improve our team? Just because the guy is injury prone means nothing. Weve had two injury prone Qbs the last two years....Why not add one that is better then both?

Now dont mistake me thinking that it would be a good idea to add romo- if the price is right- to loving him and desperately wanting him here. He is an upgrade over anything we have. If anyone disagrees with that they need their head checked. He may get hurt, he may lead us to a SB, he may not even beat out Simmy or Lynch. What we do know is that we will be adding a Vet QB this offseason. Its going to happen. Romo, Tyrod, Davis, someone. Someone will be added. Since that is happening to me it only makes sense to add the best of the bunch, one who is amongst the greats at the QB position. If we add Tyrod, so be it. Bring Davis back, ok. Id prefer romo for obvious logical reasons, but if he prices himself too high forget about it. Make no mistake though, he would drastically improve our team if he was to start. The numbers speak for themselves

King87
12-30-2016, 11:50 AM
People's love affair with Romo honestly confuses me. It's not grounded in any kind of logical thought. He's been mediocre and completely unclutch behind one of the best lines and running games in football. He's also been the most injury prone QB in the game of football...

Yet somehow, putting him behind the worst line in the NFL with no running game, he's just going to suddenly stay healthy and be a clutch player. Coming to Denver will completely break established tendencies? That's not logical.

Tony Romo has one of the best come back records and fourth quarter numbers ever. Most of his career he's spent getting knocked around carrying bad overall teams. I've seen no QB handle the nightmare of T.O. better than he, and his playmaking ability via scrambling and extending the play is on the same level of McNabb, Newton, and guys like that. He was one of the best deep ball passers in the league, and he still could throw touch passes as well. He's had one or two seasons worthy of MVP consideration, and he's done it all in Dysfunctional Dallas.

He is a borderline HoF QB who probably would have the stats had his career not started later because of his draft status.

I have serious reservations about him playing in Denver, if we were inclined to make that move. But put some respeck on that man's name!

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:12 PM
He probably would throw 20 picks and he did throw untimely interceptions. Thats romo. He also throws for tons of yards and tds. He has only had the elite Oline for 2 years now, this is not like he has had the best line in football his whole career....The career you know that has almost HOF numbers. Ya. Romo is that good. Siemian will likely never ever be that good and we can only Pray to everything holy that Lynch will be as good.

It is actually insanely logical to think one of the better QBs in this era would improve your team. Especially since he plays the most important position in football. Once again, the only major change on our team from Winning it all, to missing the playoffs was QB. We actually upgraded RT with DS from Schofield....And yet our offense is even worse! Why would we not want to improve our team? Just because the guy is injury prone means nothing. Weve had two injury prone Qbs the last two years....Why not add one that is better then both?

Now dont mistake me thinking that it would be a good idea to add romo- if the price is right- to loving him and desperately wanting him here. He is an upgrade over anything we have. If anyone disagrees with that they need their head checked. He may get hurt, he may lead us to a SB, he may not even beat out Simmy or Lynch. What we do know is that we will be adding a Vet QB this offseason. Its going to happen. Romo, Tyrod, Davis, someone. Someone will be added. Since that is happening to me it only makes sense to add the best of the bunch, one who is amongst the greats at the QB position. If we add Tyrod, so be it. Bring Davis back, ok. Id prefer romo for obvious logical reasons, but if he prices himself too high forget about it. Make no mistake though, he would drastically improve our team if he was to start. The numbers speak for themselves

I stopped reading when you called Romo one of the better QB's of our era...

King87
12-30-2016, 12:15 PM
Man...you downplay TR's very fine career but you're a gatekeeper for any criticism of TS. That's uh...that's interesting.

I believe as Denver fans we should know that judging a QB by team and postseason success is a very poor way of doing so.

King87
12-30-2016, 12:20 PM
Romo's like a smaller Big Ben who doesn't rape people. - Abraham Lincoln.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:22 PM
Tony Romo has one of the best come back records and fourth quarter numbers ever. Most of his career he's spent getting knocked around carrying bad overall teams. I've seen no QB handle the nightmare of T.O. better than he, and his playmaking ability via scrambling and extending the play is on the same level of McNabb, Newton, and guys like that. He was one of the best deep ball passers in the league, and he still could throw touch passes as well. He's had one or two seasons worthy of MVP consideration, and he's done it all in Dysfunctional Dallas.

He is a borderline HoF QB who probably would have the stats had his career not started later because of his draft status.

I have serious reservations about him playing in Denver, if we were inclined to make that move. But put some respeck on that man's name!

I'm sorry...I can't respect Romo. The guys garbage, he's always been garbage. The guy barely ever plays a whole season behind a great line. He's a product of that line, nothing more.

He has 7 seasons with 8 wins or less out of 10 seasons as a starter, he's had 3 winning seasons. He's done a grand total of nothing in his career. He's made the playoffs 4 times and has a playoff record of 2-4 (once as an 8-8 crapfest of a team)

So he puts up some flashy stats every now and then... A lot of those flashy stats happen while losing. Romo falls apart when games are important... If they need to win the game to make the playoffs, or are in a playoff game, you can count on Tony Romo to fall apart.

The guy gets way overrated by people so much...He's overwhelmingly mediocre...

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:24 PM
Man...you downplay TR's very fine career but you're a gatekeeper for any criticism of TS. That's uh...that's interesting.

I believe as Denver fans we should know that judging a QB by team and postseason success is a very poor way of doing so.

Tony Romo isn't a first year starter... That's a huge difference. It's reasonable to expect more out of a guy after 10 years in the league...not so much a kid still in his first year starting still learning how to play.

VonDoom
12-30-2016, 12:25 PM
I whole heartedly disagree...Even complete scrubs should have had some cohesion after playing together for 13 games...Look at the patriots, I'm sure the same could have been said about their line that it was just untalented, ect... They ditched their o-line coach, brought in someone who knew how to do his job and suddenly they block like pros.

Let's not forget how bad Thomas was at blocking with Barone as his coach....That wasn't 100 percent Thomas. He sucks as a line coach, plain and freaking simple.

The Patriots were the example I was going to use. We need more talent, sure, but a better coach can cover up some of our problems

King87
12-30-2016, 12:29 PM
1. Dallas has had a monster line for two seasons. For most of his career his lines were awful. Some of them were worse than what we have now.

2. Just to nitpick, if they've had a monster line for two years, he can't be a product of that line if he's played for about what, ten years now? That's a literal impossibility. If he's always hurt, and he has bene lately, he can't be a product of the line, either. Romo is not a time traveler.

3. He's had a lot of bad teams. Go look at how many sacks his line gave up. Then factor in his great mobility and playmaking ability. Go look at how awful those defenses were. Don't lay blame on a guy whose owner built a team like a 15 year old playing Madden. That's now how things work. For many years, including his first two years at that, his teams sucked. You love TS. You should sympathize with this.

4. He doesn't put up flashy stats every now and again. He consistently performs as a great QB in the NFL. With poorly built teams. As the QB of Dallas. In one of the most competitive divisions in the NFL. Would it actually be more impressive if he had the Ravens' defense in the early 2000's? That way he would have had worse stats because the money's on the defense but more wins because of that defense? Would it be more impressive if he won with some of our recent teams with good talent on O and D? Exactly what would have made it more impressive? And what would he, or should he, have done?

5. The whole 'Romo is a choker' thing is a statistical myth, btw. People point to the botched extra point and Revis pick. Sweet. Look at his entire career.

6. Respeck on his name.

King87
12-30-2016, 12:30 PM
Tony Romo isn't a first year starter... That's a huge difference. It's reasonable to expect more out of a guy after 10 years in the league...not so much a kid still in his first year starting still learning how to play.

What I'm getting at is that Romo can into the same situation, minus the defense, and played well. You should want to canonize him for this.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:31 PM
The Patriots were the example I was going to use. We need more talent, sure, but a better coach can cover up some of our problems

The talent isn't there, I can absolutely agree with that, but a better coach could have at least made what we had work. We should have by week 10 started to see improvement, instead the line really looked as crappy as it started.

Add to that, Barone has never successfully coached an o-line before. That has to be included in the evaluation of the line. We don't know how much better this players may have looked had then been taught proper execution by a competent coach.

MOtorboat
12-30-2016, 12:32 PM
The Patriots were the example I was going to use. We need more talent, sure, but a better coach can cover up some of our problems

There's only one Belicheck. Denver needs better talent, specifically tackle, guard and quarterback.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:32 PM
What I'm getting at is that Romo can into the same situation, minus the defense, and played well. You should want to canonize him for this.

It isn't the same situation at all...We have ZERO o-line...You expect a guy that's struggled to do much of anything with a talented o-line to suddenly be good without a talented o-line.

He'll be dead by game 3.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 12:34 PM
1. Dallas has had a monster line for two seasons. For most of his career his lines were awful. Some of them were worse than what we have now.

2. Just to nitpick, if they've had a monster line for two years, he can't be a product of that line if he's played for about what, ten years now? That's a literal impossibility. If he's always hurt, and he has bene lately, he can't be a product of the line, either. Romo is not a time traveler.

3. He's had a lot of bad teams. Go look at how many sacks his line gave up. Then factor in his great mobility and playmaking ability. Go look at how awful those defenses were. Don't lay blame on a guy whose owner built a team like a 15 year old playing Madden. That's now how things work. For many years, including his first two years at that, his teams sucked. You love TS. You should sympathize with this.

4. He doesn't put up flashy stats every now and again. He consistently performs as a great QB in the NFL. With poorly built teams. As the QB of Dallas. In one of the most competitive divisions in the NFL. Would it actually be more impressive if he had the Ravens' defense in the early 2000's? That way he would have had worse stats because the money's on the defense but more wins because of that defense? Would it be more impressive if he won with some of our recent teams with good talent on O and D? Exactly what would have made it more impressive? And what would he, or should he, have done?

5. The whole 'Romo is a choker' thing is a statistical myth, btw. People point to the botched extra point and Revis pick. Sweet. Look at his entire career.

6. Respeck on his name.

Agree to disagree...I don't want that turd in Denver.

King87
12-30-2016, 12:34 PM
There's only one Belicheck. Denver needs better talent, specifically tackle, guard and quarterback.

We have one very talented QB. We have another guy with weak talent. He might be good. Later. He's been average this year, if you go with the lowered expectations of a game manager.

King87
12-30-2016, 12:35 PM
Agree to disagree...I don't want that turd in Denver.

I don't want him in Denver either, but he's not a turd. He's been a fantastic player. I don't know why you hate the man so, and usually you substantiate your claims. On this one...why do you hate him?

King87
12-30-2016, 12:36 PM
It isn't the same situation at all...We have ZERO o-line...You expect a guy that's struggled to do much of anything with a talented o-line to suddenly be good without a talented o-line.

He'll be dead by game 3.

I think we're misunderstanding one another. I'm talking about Romo for most of his career. Not now. Right now his body has sustained so much damage that I think his injury is inevitable.

MOtorboat
12-30-2016, 12:37 PM
We have one very talented QB. We have another guy with weak talent. He might be good. Later. He's been average this year, if you go with the lowered expectations of a game manager.

Tony Romo would be a clear, clear upgrade over anything on the roster. Even if he's not perfect.

King87
12-30-2016, 12:39 PM
Tony Romo would be a clear, clear upgrade over anything on the roster. Even if he's not perfect.

I'm not sure if he would be. If I could believe he coudl last a season I'd probably buy it.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
12-30-2016, 12:40 PM
3 years ago Romo was a top 5 QB. I'd be thrilled if that was the guy we were getting. He didn't look the same to me the last time he played.

VonDoom
12-30-2016, 12:48 PM
There's only one Belicheck. Denver needs better talent, specifically tackle, guard and quarterback.

They were bad under Belichick last year until he got Dante Scarnecchia out of retirement

underrated29
12-30-2016, 12:50 PM
I stopped reading when you called Romo one of the better QB's of our era...
He 100% without doubt! You'll not find anyone aside from yourself who can or would try to dispute that.




I'm sorry...I can't respect Romo. The guys garbage, he's always been garbage. The guy barely ever plays a whole season behind a great line. He's a product of that line, nothing more.

He has 7 seasons with 8 wins or less out of 10 seasons as a starter, he's had 3 winning seasons. He's done a grand total of nothing in his career. He's made the playoffs 4 times and has a playoff record of 2-4 (once as an 8-8 crapfest of a team)

So he puts up some flashy stats every now and then... A lot of those flashy stats happen while losing. Romo falls apart when games are important... If they need to win the game to make the playoffs, or are in a playoff game, you can count on Tony Romo to fall apart.

The guy gets way overrated by people so much...He's overwhelmingly mediocre...


1. Dallas has had a monster line for two seasons. For most of his career his lines were awful. Some of them were worse than what we have now.

2. Just to nitpick, if they've had a monster line for two years, he can't be a product of that line if he's played for about what, ten years now? That's a literal impossibility. If he's always hurt, and he has bene lately, he can't be a product of the line, either. Romo is not a time traveler.

3. He's had a lot of bad teams. Go look at how many sacks his line gave up. Then factor in his great mobility and playmaking ability. Go look at how awful those defenses were. Don't lay blame on a guy whose owner built a team like a 15 year old playing Madden. That's now how things work. For many years, including his first two years at that, his teams sucked. You love TS. You should sympathize with this.

4. He doesn't put up flashy stats every now and again. He consistently performs as a great QB in the NFL. With poorly built teams. As the QB of Dallas. In one of the most competitive divisions in the NFL. Would it actually be more impressive if he had the Ravens' defense in the early 2000's? That way he would have had worse stats because the money's on the defense but more wins because of that defense? Would it be more impressive if he won with some of our recent teams with good talent on O and D? Exactly what would have made it more impressive? And what would he, or should he, have done?

5. The whole 'Romo is a choker' thing is a statistical myth, btw. People point to the botched extra point and Revis pick. Sweet. Look at his entire career.

6. Respeck on his name.





Was going to reply but King has me covered. Thanks for saving me the effort kinger

MOtorboat
12-30-2016, 12:51 PM
They were bad under Belichick last year until he got Dante Scarnecchia out of retirement

Well, again...we don't have that guy, unless Alex Gibbs comes out of retirement.

gregbroncs
12-30-2016, 01:06 PM
He probably would throw 20 picks and he did throw untimely interceptions. Thats romo. He also throws for tons of yards and tds. He has only had the elite Oline for 2 years now, this is not like he has had the best line in football his whole career....The career you know that has almost HOF numbers. Ya. Romo is that good. Siemian will likely never ever be that good and we can only Pray to everything holy that Lynch will be as good.

It is actually insanely logical to think one of the better QBs in this era would improve your team. Especially since he plays the most important position in football. Once again, the only major change on our team from Winning it all, to missing the playoffs was QB. We actually upgraded RT with DS from Schofield....And yet our offense is even worse! Why would we not want to improve our team? Just because the guy is injury prone means nothing. Weve had two injury prone Qbs the last two years....Why not add one that is better then both?

Now dont mistake me thinking that it would be a good idea to add romo- if the price is right- to loving him and desperately wanting him here. He is an upgrade over anything we have. If anyone disagrees with that they need their head checked. He may get hurt, he may lead us to a SB, he may not even beat out Simmy or Lynch. What we do know is that we will be adding a Vet QB this offseason. Its going to happen. Romo, Tyrod, Davis, someone. Someone will be added. Since that is happening to me it only makes sense to add the best of the bunch, one who is amongst the greats at the QB position. If we add Tyrod, so be it. Bring Davis back, ok. Id prefer romo for obvious logical reasons, but if he prices himself too high forget about it. Make no mistake though, he would drastically improve our team if he was to start. The numbers speak for themselvesRemind me in this so called HOF career how many times has he made it past the 1st round of the playoffs? How many times did his team even make the playoffs? The answer is 4 times in his entire career, and only 2 times past the 1st round. He's Jay Cutler, a gunslinger who throws the ball up for grabs, even when he shouldn't.

I'll pass on a broken Romo, Hell I'd pass if he was guaranteed 100% healthy.

Valar Morghulis
12-30-2016, 01:07 PM
I do not want Romo, not at all. But I believe he made a terrible Dallas team average to above average for years

gregbroncs
12-30-2016, 01:11 PM
I do not want Romo, not at all. But I believe he made a terrible Dallas team average to above average for years

I don't think he's a bad QB, Just a bad fit for this team at this time. I also feel he is extremely over rated.

LawDog
12-30-2016, 01:12 PM
I don't want him in Denver either, but he's not a turd. He's been a fantastic player. I don't know why you hate the man so, and usually you substantiate your claims. On this one...why do you hate him?

Amongst current players there is a distinct divide in post season play: QBs who have played 5 or more games and those who have played 2 or fewer (Alex Smith being the lone player with 5 appearances). Of that top group Tony Romo is dead last with only two wins, both of which were at home. In short, Romo has stats for days, but he hasn't won shit. And at 37 his body is worn out. He's a nice guy, has been fun to watch on occasion, but he ain't great, and he will never be in the HOF (even considering that I hate the HOF and don't really value it as a judgment of a particular player's career.)

King87
12-30-2016, 01:14 PM
Remind me in this so called HOF career how many times has he made it past the 1st round of the playoffs? How many times did his team even make the playoffs? The answer is 4 times in his entire career, and only 2 times past the 1st round. He's Jay Cutler, a gunslinger who throws the ball up for grabs, even when he shouldn't.

I'll pass on a broken Romo, Hell I'd pass if he was guaranteed 100% healthy.

Look at his INT ratio and then tell me how he's a reckless player.

Do you people just not believe in facts? Is ******* Google too god damned hard? Is the notion that a team sport being put on one player is absurd, whether it's a QB getting all the glory or all the blame?

Do you people even watch this game?

F-. There hasn't been one decent argument against him as a player (for his career). You all get F-.

As far as him in Denver, eh. I think he's taken too much damage. But if we do sign him -which seems unlikely because he's going to cost some coin and a lot of teams need a QB- I will at least have the joy of watching him play for my team. He's a class act, he was a great player, and that remains so even if most of his detractors rely on silly talking points and underdeveloped logic.

King87
12-30-2016, 01:17 PM
Amongst current players there is a distinct divide in post season play: QBs who have played 5 or more games and those who have played 2 or fewer (Alex Smith being the lone player with 5 appearances). Of that top group Tony Romo is dead last with only two wins, both of which were at home. In short, Romo has stats for days, but he hasn't won shit. And at 37 his body is worn out. He's a nice guy, has been fun to watch on occasion, but he ain't great, and he will never be in the HOF (even considering that I hate the HOF and don't really value it as a judgment of a particular player's career.)

I don't care if he hasn't won shit. He's had bad teams. Bad teams. Really bad teams. You don't get better at the game by winning a SB. Manning didn't get better at the game last year the second Elway bellowed 'this one's for Pat'. Mark Sanchez was a few throws away from the SB. Mark. Sanchez. Buttfumble.

Hawgdriver
12-30-2016, 01:21 PM
There's only one Belicheck. Denver needs better talent, specifically tackle, guard and quarterback.

There may be only one Belicheck, but he serves as the proper bellwether.

King87
12-30-2016, 01:22 PM
There may be only one Belicheck, but he serves as the proper bellwether.

Are you a wizard?

BTW, it's good to see you LawDog. I miss you. I imagine you spend a lot of time on yachts and shit.

LawDog
12-30-2016, 01:26 PM
I don't care if he hasn't won shit. He's had bad teams. Bad teams. Really bad teams. You don't get better at the game by winning a SB. Manning didn't get better at the game last year the second Elway bellowed 'this one's for Pat'. Mark Sanchez was a few throws away from the SB. Mark. Sanchez. Buttfumble.

You can't hand out F- grades and then make a stupid statement like this. Good players get to the post season and then win. Average and poor players don't. Romo is somewhere in between because he has been good in the regular season but average to poor in the playoffs.

LawDog
12-30-2016, 01:28 PM
Are you a wizard?

BTW, it's good to see you LawDog. I miss you. I imagine you spend a lot of time on yachts and shit.

I wish...

King87
12-30-2016, 01:42 PM
You can't hand out F- grades and then make a stupid statement like this. Good players get to the post season and then win. Average and poor players don't. Romo is somewhere in between because he has been good in the regular season but average to poor in the playoffs.

It's not a stupid post. It's actually rather insightful. There are plenty of good players who didn't win a SB. Ware contemplated retirement. Had he retired he literally wouldn't have been any worse at the game, or better, than he is now. I'm taking the statement quite literally to show how absurd it is. If you took Romo and you put him on, IDK, the giants, they're no less likely to win a SB. If you put him on a run first defense team, like the early steelers, well he's kind of like Big Ben, and BB wasn't exactly a precise player.

If you put Dan Marino who could make any pass in the game on the Niners, they're going to be fine. Etc. Etc. Etc. It's not always about the individual player. For my money, Antonio Brown is the best WR in football. For my money, LeVeon Bell is the best back in the game. If you took them and put them on the Steelers they're a SB contending team, albeit an inconsistent one. If you put them on the Browns you get maybe 4-6 wins.

Whose the best QB in the game? Rodgers? Brady? Pick whomever. Put them on the Browns. Where they legit have one good RB and one WR who can make some big plays. You're not making the postseason. Every SB that Brady won, Elway could have won. Brady has been on far better teams for far longer.

So I am well within logical constraints to make the statement you take issue with. Because quite literally I'm right. And figuratively, I'm also right.

Mike
12-30-2016, 02:11 PM
Romo is a good second tier QB. Not HOF-worthy in my book. I like him and if all we were missing was a good QB then I'd be down for it. But we are missing a bunch of pieces and need to use our available money fixing those problems...oline (all of it), DT, ILB, slot WR, TE, and probably a RB.

King87
12-30-2016, 02:11 PM
I don't think he's a HoFer. But his numbers and the context of his career are interesting.

NightTrainLayne
12-30-2016, 02:53 PM
I don't want Romo on this team. Please, no. He's past his "sell by" date, and we have too many other holes.

But with that out front, anyone who says he is garbage, or was a terrible QB brings into question any other football related analysis they might have made. Tony Romo was a very good QB on some really bad Cowboys teams.

LawDog
12-30-2016, 02:57 PM
It's not a stupid post. It's actually rather insightful. There are plenty of good players who didn't win a SB.

I was referring to the sentence I bolded in the previous quote - you don't get better at the game by winning a SB. That's what I think is stupid and obvious. Flacco didn't get better, neither did Dilfer, and the list goes on. It's also not relevant (literally and figuratively) to the point I was making about Romo not winning shit. He's a good QB, but that's all. There is absolutely nothing about him that will aid the Broncos going into next year.

Nomad
12-30-2016, 03:00 PM
I don't want Romo on this team. Please, no. He's past his "sell by" date, and we have too many other holes.

But with that out front, anyone who says he is garbage, or was a terrible QB brings into question any other football related analysis they might have made. Tony Romo was a very good QB on some really bad Cowboys teams.

This. Other than that, I have no opinion on Romo, though he failed to be Carrie Underwood's first. :D

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 03:18 PM
He 100% without doubt! You'll not find anyone aside from yourself who can or would try to dispute that.











Was going to reply but King has me covered. Thanks for saving me the effort kinger

Funny because I know plenty of people that share my viewpoint of Romo.

Freyaka
12-30-2016, 03:19 PM
Well, again...we don't have that guy, unless Alex Gibbs comes out of retirement.

So since we don't have that guy, don't fire Barone and try and find that guy? That doesn't make sense MO.

King87
12-30-2016, 03:36 PM
It's not a stupid post. It's actually rather insightful. There are plenty of good players who didn't win a SB.

I was referring to the sentence I bolded in the previous quote - you don't get better at the game by winning a SB. That's what I think is stupid and obvious. Flacco didn't get better, neither did Dilfer, and the list goes on. It's also not relevant (literally and figuratively) to the point I was making about Romo not winning shit. He's a good QB, but that's all. There is absolutely nothing about him that will aid the Broncos going into next year.

Right, but people are saying he's bad because he didn't win a SB. Take that notion in combination with the fact that he's been quite good and the point stands.

His lack of winning has nothing to do with how good he is as a lone player. Elway was great before he won a ring. He didn't get better at the game, he was the same guy. It only matters to us as a silly matter of principle; it's a metaphysical stricture that is unattached from reality. No one cares that Barry Sanders sucked in the playoffs. No one cares that Brandon Marshall -with a strong resume for the HoF- hasn't been to the playoffs. Most sane football fans didn't think less of PFM for not winning a SB. Marino isn't any less great because he didn't win a SB.

Some of the 'biggest winners' in NFL history were literally average at their position. Terry Bradshaw had far more bad years than good years, let alone great ones. Troy Aikman was a far weaker passer than his peers and threw far too many picks far too often with that line, on that team, with that running game and those players.

So when you say he hasn't won anything, all I can do is respond with the thing you took issue, because as much as I respect, and as grateful as I am for your insight on this board and to me personally, it's a bad argument.

MOtorboat
12-30-2016, 04:33 PM
So since we don't have that guy, don't fire Barone and try and find that guy? That doesn't make sense MO.

That's not what that said.

They need better players. Frankly, I don't really care who the line coach is going forward, that guy has to have better talent.

LawDog
12-30-2016, 04:57 PM
King

For some reason -- browser? -- when I try to quote your post it shows a couple lines then ends with no close quote bracket. I've got zero interest in trouble shooting it right now.

Anyhow, I'm not sure we really disagree on Romo. And I never said he was bad, just that he was a good QB that was sub par in the playoffs for whatever reason. Since you brought up Elway... JFE is a great QB (top 3 all time IMHO) and for the majority of his career he dragged crappy teams all the way to and through the playoffs and into the Superbowl only to have those crappy teams get exposed in humiliating losses. In his last two years he was clearly not as athletic as he had been, but was crafty and had much better teams around him than at any other time in his career. Result, back-to-back rings and a straight up G riding off into the waning sun setting in the West. Romo, however, has never loaded the team on his back and taken them anywhere. He is good, not great, and his playoff record is just one of multiple factors I use in forming that opinion.

Happy New Year!

King87
12-30-2016, 05:35 PM
King

For some reason -- browser? -- when I try to quote your post it shows a couple lines then ends with no close quote bracket. I've got zero interest in trouble shooting it right now.

Anyhow, I'm not sure we really disagree on Romo. And I never said he was bad, just that he was a good QB that was sub par in the playoffs for whatever reason. Since you brought up Elway... JFE is a great QB (top 3 all time IMHO) and for the majority of his career he dragged crappy teams all the way to and through the playoffs and into the Superbowl only to have those crappy teams get exposed in humiliating losses. In his last two years he was clearly not as athletic as he had been, but was crafty and had much better teams around him than at any other time in his career. Result, back-to-back rings and a straight up G riding off into the waning sun setting in the West. Romo, however, has never loaded the team on his back and taken them anywhere. He is good, not great, and his playoff record is just one of multiple factors I use in forming that opinion.

Happy New Year!

Elway was a beast of a man, but Elway never won a SB by himself. The point is that if one of the best ever can't do it, I'm not holding it against TR. Especially when TR ran into the eventual SB champions.

It's just a bad metric. SB's and playoff wins is just a really bad metric.

HNY!!!!

Cugel
12-30-2016, 08:31 PM
All I can say after reading that article is "OMG!" Mind officially blown.
9951

I was just fine. . . until I read this sentence.


To say Denver’s running game has been anemic would be generous; the Broncos have managed 3.6 yards per attempt, 28th best in the league, and failed to eclipse 100 yards rushing in nine games.

Sweet jumpin' Jebus. How can it be that Denver is 28th at rushing? That would mean there are FOUR teams in the NFL WORSE at running the ball than the Broncos? How is that even possible?

King87
12-30-2016, 08:47 PM
All I can say after reading that article is "OMG!" Mind officially blown.
9951

I was just fine. . . until I read this sentence.



Sweet jumpin' Jebus. How can it be that Denver is 28th at rushing? That would mean there are FOUR teams in the NFL WORSE at running the ball than the Broncos? How is that even possible?

Seven other lines have given up more sacks than ours. The Broncos o-line is really bad, but it's not even close to being historically awful.

Cugel
12-30-2016, 09:02 PM
Seven other lines have given up more sacks than ours. The Broncos o-line is really bad, but it's not even close to being historically awful.

"Historically awful" is an unfair standard. Denver's 2015 defense was historically great. Like the 1985 Bears, the 2000 Ravens and the 2002 Bucs, who managed to win SBs with such stellar QBs as Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson. Add a crippled Peyton with a torn tendon in his foot.

But that kind of thing doesn't happen very often. Neither would having an "historically bad OL" be any more probable.

I doubt they keep records on "historically bad offensive lines" but, just because Denver's line isn't that kind of awful doesn't mean it isn't surprising there are worse OLs in the NFL this past year. I honestly thought Denver was dead last - at least at running the ball.

Normally I check up on those kind of things, but this season it was far too depressing for me to want to know.

I think historically bad OL might be a once a decade kind of thing too.

BTW: I said "worst at running the ball" not sacks. The OL was bad at giving up sacks, but still better at that than at running the ball. I thought they were merely bad, not abysmal at pass-blocking.

King87
12-30-2016, 09:04 PM
"Historically awful" is an unfair standard. Denver's 2015 defense was historically great. Like the 1985 Bears, the 2000 Ravens and the 2002 Bucs, who managed to win SBs with such stellar QBs as Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson. Add a crippled Peyton with a torn tendon in his foot.

But that kind of thing doesn't happen very often. Neither would having an "historically bad OL" be any more probable.

I doubt they keep records on "historically bad offensive lines" but, just because Denver's line isn't that kind of awful doesn't mean it isn't surprising there are worse OLs in the NFL this past year.

What I'm getting at is that what we're seeing is far from unprecedented. Almost a quarter of the league has a line comparable to ours. I'm not being optimistic or pessimistic. I'm just saying that a lot of people look at the line and think they're seeing this historic shitter.

Just some accurate perspective. Just trying to give it.

Cugel
12-30-2016, 09:15 PM
What I'm getting at is that what we're seeing is far from unprecedented. Almost a quarter of the league has a line comparable to ours. I'm not being optimistic or pessimistic. I'm just saying that a lot of people look at the line and think they're seeing this historic shitter.

Just some accurate perspective. Just trying to give it.

OK. I get you now. So, we agree.

But back to the topic of Tony Romo. I just checked and his salary cap for Dallas next year is $14,000,000 in base salary, $5,000,000 pro-rated signing bonus, $5,700,000 restructure bonus (if they re-do his contract for any reason, they pay a $5.7 hit - that would include trades, unless the other team agreed to pick up the check.

Total cap hit for Romo for 2017: $24,700,000.

And you can bet your ass Dallas is not going to want to pay any of that. They will want some desperate team to take on that contract, as well as give them a top round draft pick (they've been rumored to want a 1st round pick but, that would be insane. They might get a late 2nd or maybe 3rd, but that's not the point).

THe main thing will be to get that HUGE contract off the books. They have their QB in Dak Prescott, and Romo would be the highest paid backup QB in NFL history - by a huge margin. No way they won't dump all that contract which would free up money to get more FAs and pay their other players.

In short, whatever chump pays all that we don't know. Some bottom feeder like the Browns maybe? They always do dumb-ass things. But, we do know it will not be John Elway. He ain't giving up draft picks and taking on a $20M contract. And Romo would be nuts to forfeit 1 penny of his money. Why should he? Would you? Hell no.

Me neither. He'll find someone to pay it. Some desperate coach who is about to get fired unless he starts winning in 2017 is going to convince his owner that Tony Romo is the answer. He might even be right, depending on the team.

Just like the Texans owner stupidly gave Brock Osweiler a $72 M contract, $37 million guaranteed over 4 seasons, some team will pay Tony Romo an absurd boatload of cash. Just not us.