View Full Version : NFL: Bledsoe or Romo


Zarn
Oct 09, 2006, 12:36 PM
Who would you start, if you were the Tuna?

Breakdown:

Romo
-Knows the Dallas offensive system
-Spreads the ball around effectively
-Little season experience
-Mobile
-Open communication with receivers

Bledsoe
-Knows the Dallas offensive system fairly well
-Has history with Terry Glenn
-Veteran
-Not mobile
-Tends to pass the ball to the wrong receiver in order to spread the ball (did not happen last season)
-Takes too long to decide where to throw or if to throw it away
-Some but not alot of communication with receivers (noticed limited communication in huddle but not on sideline)
-Sometimes not on the same page as receivers

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 01:25 PM
I can see the wheels spinning in your head, grasping at the hope that Romo will save the team. Don't bet on it. Bledsoe gives Dallas it's best chance at winning this year. Switching to a less experienced QB would almost certainly reduce their chances.

The trade-off is next year's production. The more experience Romo gets this year the easier it will be to make the transition to the future of the franchise, so they will definitely start him as soon as they give up hope for the SB this year.

Don't be seduced by the Cowboy fans who are impatiently pushing for Romo. They are short-sighted and caught up in the Roethlisberger Cinderella story. That's a one time in forty years event. The odds are very much against Romo swooping in and saving the team. Bledsoe is the Cowboys best bet this year.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 01:29 PM
"But he looked great in the pre-season."

Any talented QB with the weapons Dallas has will look great in the pre-season. And Romo is undeniably talented. Get him in a game at full speed and it's almost certain he'll struggle getting comfortable with the speed and ferocity of an NFL defense playing at 100%.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 01:35 PM
"It's better the start him early, even if that means pitting him against the toughest of opponents."

This may be true, but there's a great case for solid mentoring of a perspective star QB, letting him play in easier games before exposing him to a crushing defeat. It's possible that exposing him to a defense that is too tough can actually retard his potential. Why is it that some QBs throw the ball too soon, or are unable to commit 100% focus to scanning the field for the best receiver? It's because they got sacked too much in early games and are distracted by the thought of an impending hit. That factor may have already limited David Carr's career potential. And it may be why you see a QB like Bledsoe making bad snap decisions like he does. In short, starting Romo too soon may result in him playing like Bledsoe at the peak of his career.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 01:38 PM
"But you don't even like the Dallas Cowboys, Mojo."

True. I should be right alongside the "fans" in Dallas who are short-sightedly undermining any chance for Dallas to succeed this season. Go for it, Tuna! :yeah

Darkness
Oct 09, 2006, 02:08 PM
I totally agree with Mojotronica...

Red Door
Oct 09, 2006, 03:49 PM
Forget the QB, just put no one in and see who wins then. :mischief:

Zarn
Oct 09, 2006, 04:13 PM
We play Houston then the Giants. The Giants are tougher on the line rather than the QB, and Tony would be able to escape the their pass rush better than Drew. Only after these two games, does Dallas have a tough defense to play. So far, Julius Jones seems to have the # of that third team (CAR), anyway.

That brings up my next point. Dallas is dangerous with the run this year. It can bring a nasty one-two punch, and that can take pressure off Romo. Julius has carried the team before. Bledsoe lost the game that Julius brought us.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 04:36 PM
Alright, what happens if Romo loses the game against Houston or the Giants? He'd need to win both games to justify the decision to start him. If he loses either Parcells would look like a total idiot for starting him when Bledsoe is good enough to win both those games.

Zarn
Oct 09, 2006, 04:48 PM
Alright, what happens if Romo loses the game against Houston or the Giants? He'd need to win both games to justify the decision to start him. If he loses either Parcells would look like a total idiot for starting him when Bledsoe is good enough to win both those games.

He'll gain experience. We aren't getting anywhere with this year's Bledsoe. Bledsoe was okay last year. Now, he just dropped far. Romo will only get better. Bledsoe will only get worse.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 04:56 PM
That's the other thing -- Bledsoe has lost to teams that are very good this year: Jacksonville and Philadelphia -- AWAY. The odds were stacked against him in those games, in hindsight. I think you're just not able to accept that Philly is back in competitive form again. They are once again the class of the NFC-East.

Zarn
Oct 09, 2006, 05:08 PM
That's the other thing -- Bledsoe has lost to teams that are very good this year: Jacksonville and Philadelphia -- AWAY. The odds were stacked against him in those games, in hindsight. I think you're just not able to accept that Philly is back in competitive form again. They are once again the class of the NFC-East.

If they almost lost at home to Bledsoe, and they lost to New York at home, how are they the class of the NFC East?

Azale
Oct 09, 2006, 05:28 PM
They are not the class...so far they have beaten up on three AWFUL teams, and barely won a game where it was electric. They should have won, which is why I thought they would win.

Bledsoe should be the starting quaterback, unless they lose to Houston and he is the main reason why.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 05:36 PM
So far they have the best record: 4 and 1

They beat weak teams -- Houston, San Francisco and Green Bay decisively. A good team doesn't beat weak teams by a slim margin, a good team crushes weak teams, which is what Philly did in those games. They had a double-digit lead each time.

The NY Giants and the Dallas Cowboys are both competitive teams. That is, they are definitely not weak teams. So beating them is never a sure thing -- but a good team beats competitive teams more often than not.

The Eagles are now 1-1 in games against competitve teams. The loss to NY was definitely a choke because the Giants came from behind to win it. The Eagles got cocky and NY made them pay for it. Philly was pretty dominant in it's game against Dallas. McNabb's fumble gave Dallas a shot to steal the win but it looked pretty good throughout.

Obviously Dallas, NY and Washington all have issues to deal with. NY has at least had a very tough schedule. Washington looks like a paper tiger -- so much talent but they can't quite get it together. Dallas is roughly on par with NY so far, and neither has quite as much bragging rights as Philly right now.

Dropping Bledsoe is tempting because he clearly made mistakes last night, but there's really no better choice for Dallas this season. At least get past the Houston game, where Bledsoe is likely to do a great deal of damage against their weak defense (but Romo is a total crap-shoot.) If Bledsoe chokes next week Dallas could still win, and will have a better idea if he's really lost it.

Azale
Oct 09, 2006, 05:44 PM
Dallas has dominated its weaker opponents, mainly because we can run right down thier throats. Right now, we have not beaten a strong team. If we lose to the Giants, I will be truly worried.

I will say one nice thing about Philly, McNabb will win the MVP award this year. He is amazing, a top 3 quaterback definately.

Mojotronica
Oct 09, 2006, 05:58 PM
Dallas did great against Tennessee and will do great against Houston -- unless they bring Romo in. Then it's still likely they win but not a sure thing.

They also beat Washington decisively, although the 'skins benched Portis that week because their coach has lost his mind. They are 1-2 against strong teams. Yeah, the Giants game will be huge for the Cowboys.

Zarn
Oct 09, 2006, 05:59 PM
If Bledsoe chokes next week Dallas could still win, and will have a better idea if he's really lost it.

Fair enough.

I guess if Jones (2nd in the League in yards per game and subject to change tonight) could win it for Romo (if he falters), he may be able to do it if Bledsoe falters. Is that logical enough for you? :p

Darkness
Oct 10, 2006, 01:52 AM
Bledsoe will play against the Texans...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/nfl/10/09/cowboys.bledsoe.ap/index.html

Zarn
Oct 10, 2006, 05:20 AM
Bledsoe will play against the Texans...
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/nfl/10/09/cowboys.bledsoe.ap/index.html

I know. This was just searching for the opinions of others.

dgfred
Oct 10, 2006, 12:11 PM
Bledsoe should start the entire season unless injured, Romo will be fine next
year if that's the path the Cowboys want to take. Bledsoe can play, he just
needs a little more protection which the Tuna can do with a couple of coaching moves. ;)

Zarn
Oct 28, 2006, 06:36 AM
Looks like we are about to find out tomorrow night, if Romo was a good decision or not.

Mojotronica
Oct 28, 2006, 12:24 PM
Yep -- the die was cast with that loss to New York...

Zarn
Oct 30, 2006, 05:47 AM
He looked alot better in Carolina. I hope he continues to improve.

Darkness
Oct 30, 2006, 06:00 AM
He looked alot better in Carolina. I hope he continues to improve.

No offense intended, but IMHO that had a lot to do with the total disappearance of anything resembling to pass-rushing on the side of the Carolina Panthers...

But still, a good result, and a marked improvement compared to the previous game.

Azale
Oct 30, 2006, 06:03 AM
The Panthers do not just "lose" thier pass rush in one game. Cowboys line blocked better and Romo did not hold onto the ball. He also remained patient and threw short passes pretty frequently. He knows how to find Owens too, which is a plus.

I was impressed, I want to see how he does in Washington, but I might be changing my mind regarding the switch.

Zarn
Oct 30, 2006, 08:30 AM
No offense intended, but IMHO that had a lot to do with the total disappearance of anything resembling to pass-rushing on the side of the Carolina Panthers...

But still, a good result, and a marked improvement compared to the previous game.

The Offensive line is very hot and cold. It had nothing to do with Carolina's line. The line has looked good in half of our games this year and looked good before Adams went down last year.

Mojotronica
Oct 30, 2006, 08:41 AM
I thought he looked good against Carolina, which is not a push-over team. Could be that Zarn was (gulp) right all along...

Darkness
Oct 30, 2006, 01:29 PM
I thought he looked good against Carolina, which is not a push-over team. Could be that Zarn was (gulp) right all along...

Maybe...
But they'll still have the ups and downs that come with playing an inexperienced QB, and if the line is as inconsistent as it appears to be then it could be feast or famine every game.

But still, like I said before, a good result, so it seems that (at least so far) Parcells has made the right choice.

Though in all honesty, I don't see Dallas making the playoffs with either Romo or Bledsoe at QB. IMHO there are at least 6 better teams in the NFC at the moment, but it's a long season, so everything could be different a month from now.

dgfred
Oct 30, 2006, 02:44 PM
The Offensive line is very hot and cold. It had nothing to do with Carolina's line. The line has looked good in half of our games this year and looked good before Adams went down last year.

I may be wrong, because Romo really did play well :goodjob: - but he doesn't
look to have the cannon arm that most pro QBs have :scan: /// or maybe he
didn't need to use it against the Panthers :mischief: .

covok48
Oct 30, 2006, 11:53 PM
I watched the Eagles, Giants game so sorry if I'm coming in a little late.

Bledsoe got sacked over and over. Half of that can be attributed to the mediocre offensive line, the other half was him holding onto the ball too long. He doesn't move, he doesn't spread the ball around, and he makes an awful lot of bad decisions at crucial times in the game (ex. the int returned ofr a TD in the final drive of the Eagles game). The Giants game was more of the same until Romo came in. Sure he had rooki-esqe 3 picks but I saw him make better throws, spread the ball out, and get the hell out of the pocket when pressured.

Not to mention 1 TD and thankfully one pick against Carolina. I say he stays the rest of the season. Bledsoe once was an above average quarterback, now he's a bit over the hill and only getting older.

Azale
Oct 31, 2006, 06:08 AM
Truth. I was supporting Bledsoe, but it just seems he isn't fit for this team right now. His strengths are flinging the ball downfield, he makes excellent throws from anywhere really, but when he is pressured he turns into a completely different player. Sometimes he seems to think he can make any throw, and he throws like one of my quaterbacks in NCAA 07 (precision passing my arse) ;)

It may seem obvious "duh pressuring Bledsoe does that", but he played much better last year, even with the line breaking down like it did after Adams was injured.

So, Romo for this year. Parcells better not switch again or I'm punching something. I do NOT want to see Drew Stanton in a Cowboys uniform.

Panzeh
Nov 02, 2006, 07:58 AM
Drew Bledsoe did a lot better last year handling pressure than he did this year. Last year he punished teams for blitzing heavily.

Maybe it was Sean Payton's offensive schemes.

GoodEnoughForMe
Nov 02, 2006, 11:21 AM
Romo's stats will diminish once teams fully scout him.

Zarn
Nov 02, 2006, 01:36 PM
Romo's stats will diminish once teams fully scout him.

You have to factor in that he will be more experienced. He is Bledsoe but more mobile, has a quicker release, and he targets Owens more.

GoodEnoughForMe
Nov 02, 2006, 07:50 PM
You have to factor in that he will be more experienced. He is Bledsoe but more mobile, has a quicker release, and he targets Owens more.

A couple of games isn't enough I don't think. Experience is really more like a full season or two when we're talking about NFL QB's.

Inter4
Nov 18, 2007, 05:58 PM
Romo's stats will diminish once teams fully scout him.


sorry for the resurrection.. but I have to laugh at this post :mischief:

I realize it's easy to talk one year later.