Romo fails in another close game

TO isn't a risk, he's a cancer. Might make you lose weight and win games but in the end, he'll kill you with his self righteousness and big mouth.

 

T.O is a great receiver and can be argued to be in top 5. There is more to it than touchdowns. I would say first downs on 3rd and long are more critical to wins, and say more about your receiver being clutch.

But he is #1 amongst Prima donnas. Every single team he has been on, he has been contentious at best, and divisive at worst. He has settled down a bit the last couple of years but only because he has a young QB that bent to his will. As long as he gets the rock, he shuts up.

Case in point, the last series Romo went to his TE and TO had plenty to say on the sidelines. As a teammate he has and does stink on ice. He always will. A pity his talent allows this aspect to be overlooked and he can still retain a job, because he represents a lot of what is wrong with professional sports in general.

 

ESPN asked an impressive panel of 7 noteworthy NFL experts, including 3 Hall of Famers, to vote on the best WR in NFL history (you can see the list and bios of the 7 panelists at the bottom of the article). http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3309223

They came up with this:

1. Jerry Rice
2. Randy Moss
3. Don Hutson
4. Michael Irvin
5. Paul Warfield
6. Charley Taylor
7. Steve Largent
8. Cris Carter
9. T.O.
10. Marvin Harrison

3 of the 7 panelists didn't even put T.O. in their Top 10 ("The No. 1 job, you gotta catch it," one of the dissenters said. "You would never consider a guy who drops 17 balls in a season. It's off-the-board ridiculous.")

The other 4 ranked T.O. #3, #6, #7, and #10.

... Most panelists criticized the Dallas Cowboys receiver for dropping far too many passes. (Owens dropped a league-high 17 in 2006 and 10 more in 2007, tied for third-most in the league, according to Stats, LLC.) ... "(Owens) probably drops too many passes to be on this list," Dowler said
...
said Johnson..."The reasons why he shouldn't be in are because he drops too many balls, he isn't as consistent, he's not a complete wide receiver in my book, he doesn't dominate all the time, he doesn't dominate in playoff games, he didn't help his team win the Super Bowl and he's selfish."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3309223

 

How many rings does TO have?

Uhh, Crayton and Williams have done absolutely nothing this year.

When Romo was out, Cowboys offense was nowhere to be found. How did TO make them better.

Take off the TO glasses clair.

 

that argument would be a lot stronger had you not referenced Chris Carter just a minute ago as one of the best.

How many does he have?

A WR is not a QB. He is a compliment. He isn't the end-all, do-all.

And in the NFL, you can have great RBs, WRs, TEs, etc... no QB, you've got nothing.

That's why Barry Sanders never won a Superbowl.

So just winning alone is not the sole factor.

It's winning + on-field performance.

And the stuff about the drops. That is indeed T.O.'s weakness. But that also says to me that he is open more often than anyone else, that he is also able to get his stats, while also having that problem.

I just don't understand why Moss, who:

a. is a criminal
b. who is a worse teammate than T.O. (quit on his team mid-game)
c. also has no rings

gets this free pass, but T.O. doesn't.

 

Like I posted above, those impressive NFL panelists that voted on best WR in NFL history put Cris Carter above T.O.

Carter was only one of the only 4 WRs that at least 5 of the panelists put on their Top 10 list (Marvin Harrison, Randy Moss and Jerry Rice were the other 3).

 

that's fine.

But I am one of the few here who base my opinions off how I think and how I feel and not how a set of panelists or how a few guys on ESPN feel.

I'm talking about a few here moreso than others, and you're not one of the ones I'm talking to in this particular issue.

 

Dude, go read who those panelists are. If you think you know more about NFL football than those guys, then you are a fool.

As for how you think and feel, you do realize that you are infatuated with the Cowboys, Jerry Jones, Tony Romo and Terrell Owens, right? Your opinion of T.O. is not objective.

 

so effing what?

I am a fan.

Let me be a fan.

You think stuff you and the others (including myself) say in the LSU forum is "objective?"

Let me be a fan. Who cares if what I say is objective or not. That's the great thing about sports. We will never know for sure who is right or wrong in this particular argument.

When I am voting for the hall of fame, then I will put my star to the side.

But until then, let me be a Cowboys fan and if you don't agree with what I say on this subject, then just take it all with a grain of salt. You not offending me any, I promise.

 

While panelists played and watched the game for years the game they are still selfish and biased -- see MLB HOF committee (I know they schemed against that but it doesnt work in this case). I would bet half of the guys voted with one eye on his game tape and another eye on his press conference tapes.

I dont think you can positively say T.O. was not one of the top five receivers of all-time and you can make a case for some other receivers being ahead of him. His stats will back it up though. And generally the only argument against stats are that a receiver or two didnt have good QB but had more athleticism than certain guys, but not many have been blessed with the athleticism that T.O. has.