Jacobs: Romo Isn't That Good

[Anthony]

Dallas Morning News - Brandon Jacobs took some shots at Tony Romo on Thursday in a radio interview.

"I don't think he's that good a passer, to be honest with you," Jacobs said.

"I'm not a fan of Tony Romo, no. Keep him in the pocket, he's not that good. His luck will be gone sooner or later. If you were to keep Tony Romo in the pocket he's not that effective.

You tell 'em Earth!

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/07/big-mouth-giants-rb-brandon-jacobs-bashe.html

[Rayman]

Jacobs is a moron.

Romo, like any other good QB, is far better when he has all day to make a throw. Just because he makes plays on the run doesn't mean he's not good at it.

[Champ]

Jacobs is a moron.

Romo, like any other good QB, is far better when he has all day to make a throw. Just because he makes plays on the run doesn't mean he's not good at it.

I love your little stat in your sig. Its soo much easier to have a higher QB rating when you have played less games in a season.

[FlawLeSs]

is it wrong to agree with jacobs?

[Rayman]

I love your little stat in your sig. Its soo much easier to have a higher QB rating when you have played less games in a season.

He played 16 the year before. Also is tied with Peyton for active best overall.

And it's not like 114 is just slightly better than 93.

[Champ]

He played 16 the year before. Also is tied with Peyton for active best overall.

And it's not like 114 is just slightly better than 93.

3 more games he could of had some pretty bad games.

Also since when is judging a QB by his rating tell you how great he is?

[CrimsonGhost56]

bottom line is romo cant win the big game. he puts up gaudy numbers and is a top 10 qb but the fact remains he cant win the big game. i dont see him lasting more than two more years in dallas if he cant win a playoff game.

[Champ]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgm3zq2204o[/media]

Here ya go. Romo is a beast.

[Rayman]

QB rating is the worst stat in all of major sports imo..

How about we go with wins..or even playoff appearances.

OK

30 wins in 2 1/2 years.

2 playoff appearances in that span.

And no other player in the sport would be scrutinized for not winning playoff games in such a short span.

He'll win in his career. And he'll win big.

[Rayman]

Romo's not a top 5 quarterback like many people would argue. He had two good seasons and has not done shit since.

Not done shit since?

It's only been one season, wracked by injuries not only to himself, but to 3/5 of his offensive line, his # target gimpy the entire second half, and the drama that was or wasn't caused by TO (depending on who you believe)

He was far from terrible last year. Still would take him over anyone not named Peyton, Tom, or Ben

[1ke]

OK

30 wins in 2 1/2 years.

2 playoff appearances in that span.

And no other player in the sport would be scrutinized for not winning playoff games in such a short span.

He'll win in his career. And he'll win big.

You sound like Parcells, dont know if thats good or bad.

[Rayman]

no sense in arguing with someone who has Tony Homo in a fucking Superman shirt as their avatar...


BTW, 0 playoff wins..

lol your bias is showing.

everytime I have this argument with someone it's the same stupid thing.

"He has no playoff wins"

Wow. God forbid a QB not win a Super Bowl in his first three years under center. It's never anything else.

Only because of the team he plays for. Your blind hatred makes me smile.

Just like I will be smiling after Dallas dominates Jacobs and the Giants yet again on Sept 20. :D

Romo will have at least 3TDs that night, btw.

[Rayman]

You sound like Parcells, dont know if thats good or bad.

I subscribe to his school of coaching, which is probably sad.

[Saluki]

OK

30 wins in 2 1/2 years.

2 playoff appearances in that span.

And no other player in the sport would be scrutinized for not winning playoff games in such a short span.

He'll win in his career. And he'll win big.

I'm sorry but.

The COWBOYS have won 30 games and had 2 play off apperances in that span, he was given a team with 14 fucking pro-bowlers and couldn't win in the playoffs. They have given him every single tool any QB could ever ask for, a good oline, All-pro TE, WR, and RB and he STILL can't win. That should tell you more than anything else. in 2007 the Pats added an All-Pro WR and won 18 games. This year the Cowboys added an all-pro WR to a team that already had an All-pro TE, All-pro WR and pro bowl cailber RB and they didn't even make the playoffs.

How a team does, good or bad, is often put on the QB. On Paper he's had the best team in the NFL for two years, if he can't "win big" with that squad he won't be winning big anytime soon.

[Rayman]

I'm sorry but.

The COWBOYS have won 30 games and had 2 play off apperances in that span, he was given a team with 14 fucking pro-bowlers and couldn't win in the playoffs. They have given him every single tool any QB could ever ask for, a good oline, All-pro TE, WR, and RB and he STILL can't win. That should tell you more than anything else. in 2007 the Pats added an All-Pro WR and won 18 games. This year the Cowboys added an all-pro WR to a team that already had an All-pro TE, All-pro WR and pro bowl cailber RB and they didn't even make the playoffs.

How a team does, good or bad, is often put on the QB. On Paper he's had the best team in the NFL for two years, if he can't "win big" with that squad he won't be winning big anytime soon.

So when they win it's the team and when they lose it's the QB?

Why were these 13 "All-Pros" so lackluster before he took over?

The Pats are coached by the greatest mind of this era.

The Cowboys are coached by a soft fatty who is a good DCoordinator and not much else.

Not only that, but he has an OC who for the last two years has no concept of ball control and constantly has him airing it out with the same 5 basic plays.

If this team was so good that anyone could lead it, how come Drew Bledsoe, Brad Johnson and Brooks Bollinger couldn't do jack shit with it?

Funny you should end your post with a pic describing "failure", because your argument is full of it.