Would you trade a 1st Round Pick for Tony Romo? | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Would you trade a 1st Round Pick for Tony Romo?

There's no way that will ever happen! The weakness the Cowboys have are in the secondary and on the Oline, they also would like to beef up the Dline a little more. They are not going to take a QB in a extremely strong DL draft and factor in a top CB may very well be there at 9. There's a greater chance 99.99999999999% that any of this talk about Newton has more to do with drumming up interest for teams behind the Cowboys to move up in a trade scenario.

They won't trading a franchise QB for a hopefull, it makes no sense what so ever.

I agree, but this IS Jerry Jones we are talking about... He probably fell in love with Cam the second he proclaimed himself to be an icon.
 
Romo is a stat QB, he's not a winner. I like him, he comes across as a likeable guy but he just doesn't get it done in big games. QB is about winning, he's been the QB of Dallas full time for Dallas since 2006 and has one playoff win- a WC win at home before getting crushed the next week and in this time period we have heard how talenented Dallas is and they have been a SB favorite every year. Would he be an upgrade over Henne? of course but Romo is not a great QB.

Manning was a "stat QB" too. Until he won the Superbowl. Just sayin'...
 
Manning was a "stat QB" too. Until he won the Superbowl. Just sayin'...

Manning still is a stat QB just a much better one than Romo. If Peyton would play in postseason like he does in the reg season he'd have at least 4 SBs by now.
 
I don't know why everyone says he is overrated. I'm stuck here in Cowboys country, so I unfortunately have to watch the Cowboys quite often. The guy is a playmaker, period. I'd trade number 15 for him without a second thought. Tony Romo on this team instantly makes this a top 15 offense...

Same here. The guy is a playmaker. One of the local radio shows calls him Jedi Master Romo, because time after time he makes some kind of crazy play that he has no business making, yet it works for big gains.

I'd trade #15 for him in a heartbeat and laugh all the way into the playoffs next year.

Dallas has been a dysfunctional team because of their owner/GM with his poor drafts, poor free agent choices, and poor coaching hires. I don't count that against Romo.
 
Aaron Rodgers was a "stat guy" too, until he won a championship. Junc's arguments here are as predictable here as they are tired... and significantly, they're wrong.

Sports is about tomorrow, not yesterday. I don't care how many playoff games you've won. It doesn't mean you'll win one more. It doesn't mean you even deserve the credit for those you've won. Anyone with two eyes could see Aaron Rodgers was good enough to win a championship. If as a hypothetical you had a chance to get him a year or two ago and begged off in favor of a guy who's won a few playoff games -- like a Mark Sanchez -- then you're dumber than a jar of money spunk.

Tony Romo absolutely is good enough to win a championship. He's a better QB than Sanchez, than Joe Flacco, than Eli Manning, than a bunch of guys who've won playoff games. Nobody who knows anything scouts and ranks quarterbacks primarily by playoff victories. It's as dumb a way to do it as there is. Junc just spends so much time on message boards he takes positions that you can defend with numbers and stats rather than positions that, you know, require you to actually know what you're talking about.

Jim Plunkett won two Super Bowls as a starter. Yet, he was never good enough as a player to even make a Pro Bowl, and was replaced as a starter everywhere he went. If you'd rather have him as your starter in some hypothetical than Dan Fouts, who never even made a Super Bowl game, then all I can tell you is I want you as the GM for a team in my division. I'm going to kick your dumb *** every time.

Tony Romo is absolutely worth a first. He's worth actually somewhat more than that. And I'd be willing to pay it.
 
No. I want someone who can win in both the regular season and playoffs. Romo is over rated IMO.
 
Manning still is a stat QB just a much better one than Romo. If Peyton would play in postseason like he does in the reg season he'd have at least 4 SBs by now.

"Stat QB" who has had his team in the playoffs something like 10 straight years. I'll take that everyday.

This isn't about Manning though, it's about Romo. The guy just makes plays. I don't think I've ever seen another QB take so much flack for nothing. Before he went down to injury this season, he had something like 4-5 games his team lost off of some stupid mess up. Against the Redskins, he hits Roy Williams in the endzone in the last seconds for the win, only to have the TD negated by a hold on Alex Barron. The amount of drops by his WRs against the Bears was out of control. Even sure-handed Miles Austin dropped a few. I could keep going, but it's irrelevant. The point is the guy gets a raw-deal. Put him on a team with a competent front office and coach and the guy will thrive. I don't think he gets moved personally. However, I do think he will have an All-Pro year under Garret this season...
 
I think he is definitely worth a mid-first round pick, but I still say don't do it. It's not giving up the pick, it's the decision that "this is our QB of the present and the future" that means you have tied your fortunes to the guy and are no longer looking to find a QB. I'm still hopeful that we find our own QB of the present/future and he will prove to be superior to Romo (seems delusional, I know, but that's how I feel). I like Romo, I've had him once or twice as a fantasy QB. In my mind the jury is still out on his ability to win big-time, and for that reason I say we keep our first rounder and keep searching for our guy. Romo is definitely worth more than a mid-first rounder, I just would prefer we don't go that route.
 
Aaron Rodgers was a "stat guy" too, until he won a championship. Junc's arguments here are as predictable here as they are tied... and significantly, they're wrong.

Sports is about tomorrow, not yesterday. I don't care how many playoff games you've won. It doesn't mean you'll win one more. It doesn't mean you even deserve the credit for those you've won. Anyone with two eyes could see Aaron Rodgers was good enough to win a championship. If as a hypothetical you had a chance to get him a year or two ago and begged off in favor of a guy who's won a few playoff games -- like a Mark Sanchez -- then you're dumber than a jar of money spunk.

Tony Romo absolutely is good enough to win a championship. He's a better QB than Sanchez, than Joe Flacco, than Eli Manning, than a bunch of guys who've won playoff games. Nobody who knows anything scouts and ranks quarterbacks primarily by playoff victories. It's as dumb a way to do it as there is. Junc just spends so much time on message boards he's takes positions that you can defend with numbers and stats rather than positions that, you know, require you to actually know what you're talking about.

Jim Plunkett won two Super Bowls as a starter. Yet, he was never good enough as a player to even make a Pro Bowl, and was replaced as a starter everywhere he went. If you'd rather have him as your starter in some hypothetical than Dan Fouts, who never even made a Super Bowl game, then all I can tell you is I want you as the GM for a team in my division. I'm going to kick your dumb *** every time.

Tony Romo is absolutely worth a first. He's worth actually somewhat more than that. And I'd be willing to pay it.

Thank you Mr. Magoo, I love when logic wins. Its such a incredible feeling.
 
Aaron Rodgers was a "stat guy" too, until he won a championship. Junc's arguments here are as predictable here as they are tired... and significantly, they're wrong.

Sports is about tomorrow, not yesterday. I don't care how many playoff games you've won. It doesn't mean you'll win one more. It doesn't mean you even deserve the credit for those you've won. Anyone with two eyes could see Aaron Rodgers was good enough to win a championship. If as a hypothetical you had a chance to get him a year or two ago and begged off in favor of a guy who's won a few playoff games -- like a Mark Sanchez -- then you're dumber than a jar of money spunk.

Tony Romo absolutely is good enough to win a championship. He's a better QB than Sanchez, than Joe Flacco, than Eli Manning, than a bunch of guys who've won playoff games. Nobody who knows anything scouts and ranks quarterbacks primarily by playoff victories. It's as dumb a way to do it as there is. Junc just spends so much time on message boards he takes positions that you can defend with numbers and stats rather than positions that, you know, require you to actually know what you're talking about.

Jim Plunkett won two Super Bowls as a starter. Yet, he was never good enough as a player to even make a Pro Bowl, and was replaced as a starter everywhere he went. If you'd rather have him as your starter in some hypothetical than Dan Fouts, who never even made a Super Bowl game, then all I can tell you is I want you as the GM for a team in my division. I'm going to kick your dumb *** every time.

Tony Romo is absolutely worth a first. He's worth actually somewhat more than that. And I'd be willing to pay it.


Gospel, ****ing gospel.
 
Back
Top Bottom