ESPN: "Realistic Chance" of Tony Romo becoming a Bear

[Funkster]

Reports are that Romo will be released with a verbal agreement on what teams he can't sign with. That should take Houston out of the picture.

Hmm, interesting. Like a non-compete clause. Guessing Bears won't be on their list of teams they give a rat's ass about, but it doesn't matter. He's going to be a backup in Denver because that's where he wants to go, and that's the team that wants him more than anybody.

Don't know about Denver. 2 promising young QB's and a bad offensive line.

Exactly! The obvious teams have to be bears, niners and jets.

Bears - I can see why the bears could be intriguing to Romo, QB friendly offensive system, good O-line, RB, TE, and if Jeffery is resigned a very promising WR corps. Not to mention a solid defense that is trending up and ready to have a "break out" season.

Niners - not much going on for this team except a new GM and HC. This team will be rebuilding. Only plus I can think of is Shannahan talking a big talk using his success in Atlanta as the bate.

Jets - this is a team that needs a QB but makes little scenes. This team is aging fast and IMO is pretty far off from turning the corner. Plus, they play in the AFC east and would be competing with the Pats for the division, good luck with that.

[Adipost]

Jeremiah thinks Romo goes to Chicago

[video][/video]

[RING4CHI]

If Romo can't stay healthy beyond Dallas' offensive line, what makes people think he's a fit in Chicago?

[Adipost]

If Romo can't stay healthy beyond Dallas' offensive line, what makes people think he's a fit in Chicago?

His injury history is overblown. His injury last season was purely a football injury, not some reoccurring issue with his back. It required no surgery and he was healed in 6 weeks. Romo actually tried to hide the injury to keep on playing.

[Mikefive]

Reports are that Romo will be released with a verbal agreement on what teams he can't sign with. That should take Houston out of the picture.

Hmm, interesting. Like a non-compete clause. Guessing Bears won't be on their list of teams they give a rat's ass about, but it doesn't matter. He's going to be a backup in Denver because that's where he wants to go, and that's the team that wants him more than anybody.

Don't know about Denver. 2 promising young QB's and a bad offensive line.

Exactly! The obvious teams have to be bears, niners and jets.

Bears - I can see why the bears could be intriguing to Romo, QB friendly offensive system, good O-line, RB, TE, and if Jeffery is resigned a very promising WR corps. Not to mention a solid defense that is trending up and ready to have a "break out" season.

Niners - not much going on for this team except a new GM and HC. This team will be rebuilding. Only plus I can think of is Shannahan talking a big talk using his success in Atlanta as the bate.

Jets - this is a team that needs a QB but makes little scenes. This team is aging fast and IMO is pretty far off from turning the corner. Plus, they play in the AFC east and would be competing with the Pats for the division, good luck with that.

But if you're Romo in the twilight of your career, why would you want to go to any of those rebuild projects??? That makes no sense at all.

Why would Romo honor some alleged verbal agreement? That's like saying... "We're terminating your contract and we know you want to go to a team with playoff aspirations, but you just need to agree not to." What does Romo get out of it? He gets to look in the mirror and say he's a good guy? Romo is in a kinda desperate situation right now. He wants a shot a winning in the worst way and his options are very limited.

What would be more interesting if that was in a written contract (assuming that's somehow legal under the CBA). Here Tony. We'll give you $10M on the day you send your retirement letter in if you don't play with this list of teams. Now that would make more sense than having some verbal no-no list that he doesn't get compensated in any way for abiding by.

[wab]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

[G08]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

Funny you mentioned Peterman... I have a feeling we might double dip at QB this draft. Watson at #3 and Peterman in round 4 if/when he's still there.

[wab]

I actually don't dislike Peterman. He's just not Watson. He's basically a more nimble Matt Barkley with a slightly better arm.

[G08]

I actually don't dislike Peterman. He's just not Watson. He's basically a more nimble Matt Barkley with a slightly better arm.

Pretty much, and he's run a Pro system so I think his transition might be easier. It's instant QB controversy but hey, it worked very well for the Redskins.

[Rusty Trombagent]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

Funny you mentioned Peterman... I have a feeling we might double dip at QB this draft. Watson at #3 and Peterman in round 4 if/when he's still there.

if we double dip, deshone kizer will be available in the 6th. i'd be up for that.

[Adipost]

I actually don't dislike Peterman. He's just not Watson. He's basically a more nimble Matt Barkley with a slightly better arm.

Am I the only one who thinks Barkley > Peterman?

[wab]

I actually don't dislike Peterman. He's just not Watson. He's basically a more nimble Matt Barkley with a slightly better arm.

Am I the only one who thinks Barkley > Peterman?

No. I think Barkley has an edge over Peterman.

[Funkster]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

What makes no sense is saying Romo makes no sense. True he hasn't played much. But, again, he's not some unproven rookie. Watch his drive vs. the eagles. That looked like 2014 Tony Romo to me. Who knows, maybe sitting out gave his body the time he needed to fully heel. Who knows, maybe being replaced and watching from the sidelines sparked a bigger fire than he already had? This guy is a winner and is clutch. He can get the ball out of his hands fast and he can spread the ball around as well as stretch the field. This guy has a brain and knows what color uniform his team is wearing. He throws TD's not INT's! If Barkley can have the bears offense looking decent, imagine what a QB like Romo could do?

[wab]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

What makes no sense is saying Romo makes no sense. True he hasn't played much. But, again, he's not some unproven rookie. Watch his drive vs. the eagles. That looked like 2014 Tony Romo to me. Who knows, maybe sitting out gave his body the time he needed to fully heel. Who knows, maybe being replaced and watching from the sidelines sparked a bigger fire than he already had? This guy is a winner and is clutch. He can get the ball out of his hands fast and he can spread the ball around as well as stretch the field. This guy has a brain and knows what color uniform his team is wearing. He throws TD's not INT's! If Barkley can have the bears offense looking decent, imagine what a QB like Romo could do?

So you trust Romo to stay healthy behind a line that put two QB's on IR. The same Romo that has been perpetually injured for the better part of two years?

Did everyone just forget that Romo's play nearly got Garrett fired at least twice? He was basically a more likable version of Cutler for most of his career.

[G08]

What makes no sense is saying Romo makes no sense. True he hasn't played much. But, again, he's not some unproven rookie. Watch his drive vs. the eagles. That looked like 2014 Tony Romo to me. Who knows, maybe sitting out gave his body the time he needed to fully heel. Who knows, maybe being replaced and watching from the sidelines sparked a bigger fire than he already had? This guy is a winner and is clutch. He can get the ball out of his hands fast and he can spread the ball around as well as stretch the field. This guy has a brain and knows what color uniform his team is wearing. He throws TD's not INT's! If Barkley can have the bears offense looking decent, imagine what a QB like Romo could do?

That cost Dallas a playoff game!

#Clutch

Lord have mercy

[wab]

I'm not going to pretend that Romo isn't a good QB. He is. He just has far too many question marks for me to want to count on him. I also think when it comes to Romo, there's an awful lot of revisionist history with him because he isn't, well, Cutler. And anyone that isn't Cutler is typically perceived to be better than they really are.

I'd wager that overall the Bears would be better off with Hoyer next season than Romo. Easier contract, similar production, less expectations.

Plus, bringing Romo in kind of flies in the face of what Pace has been saying he wants to do since the season ended.

[thunderspirit]

I'm not going to pretend that Romo isn't a good QB. He is. He just has far too many question marks for me to want to count on him. I also think when it comes to Romo, there's an awful lot of revisionist history with him because he isn't, well, Cutler. And anyone that isn't Cutler is typically perceived to be better than they really are.

I'd wager that overall the Bears would be better off with Hoyer next season than Romo. Easier contract, similar production, less expectations.

Plus, bringing Romo in kind of flies in the face of what Pace has been saying he wants to do since the season ended.

[Rusty Trombagent]

I'm not going to pretend that Romo isn't a good QB. He is. He just has far too many question marks for me to want to count on him.

yeah!
like, if we were trading for romo 5 years ago? fuck yeah i'd be on board, i think most people here would be. but if you're going to throw away a ton of money at an old qb after multiple surgeries, the result better be a superbowl, and we arent quite there yet.

[Boris13c]

I'm not going to pretend that Romo isn't a good QB. He is. He just has far too many question marks for me to want to count on him. I also think when it comes to Romo, there's an awful lot of revisionist history with him because he isn't, well, Cutler. And anyone that isn't Cutler is typically perceived to be better than they really are.

what you said earlier applies - Romo is simply a more likeable version of Cutler ... and we should say no to both

I'd wager that overall the Bears would be better off with Hoyer next season than Romo. Easier contract, similar production, less expectations.

eh ... I want them to admit they are rebuilding by drafting a QB rather than continuing to plug holes as a temporary fix they hope becomes permanent ... let Hoyer go seek a place where he will be wanted for the next 3 years or more

Plus, bringing Romo in kind of flies in the face of what Pace has been saying he wants to do since the season ended.

I think bringing back Hoyer sends that same message, the only difference being the price tag attached

[Funkster]

This still makes absolutely no sense. Romo has barely played in like two years. He'll get hurt 6 games in and the Bears will have to stumble through the season with Nathan Peterman or some other 4th round garbage.

What makes no sense is saying Romo makes no sense. True he hasn't played much. But, again, he's not some unproven rookie. Watch his drive vs. the eagles. That looked like 2014 Tony Romo to me. Who knows, maybe sitting out gave his body the time he needed to fully heel. Who knows, maybe being replaced and watching from the sidelines sparked a bigger fire than he already had? This guy is a winner and is clutch. He can get the ball out of his hands fast and he can spread the ball around as well as stretch the field. This guy has a brain and knows what color uniform his team is wearing. He throws TD's not INT's! If Barkley can have the bears offense looking decent, imagine what a QB like Romo could do?

So you trust Romo to stay healthy behind a line that put two QB's on IR. The same Romo that has been perpetually injured for the better part of two years?

Did everyone just forget that Romo's play nearly got Garrett fired at least twice? He was basically a more likable version of Cutler for most of his career.

Yes. Combine Barkley and Hoyer we're only sacked 10 times in 416 attempts. The Bears systems and O-line are more than capable to keep Romo clean.

Romo's play led him inside the top 30 on most all time stat lines. It also led him to 4 pro bowls. I 100% disagree with Romo is a more likable version of Cutler. Cutler doesn't nearly have the body of work as Romo.

"The next two months are going to be huge for that," Pace said. "It's critical we get that right." IMO, the only way to get the QB position "right" is to bring in an established vet QB, such as Cousins or Romo, back them up with an established back up like Hoyer and draft whatever QB fits the direction the team is going.

The assumption that Romo demands some ridiculous contract is one of the few things I believe don't make any sense.

[Funkster]

What makes no sense is saying Romo makes no sense. True he hasn't played much. But, again, he's not some unproven rookie. Watch his drive vs. the eagles. That looked like 2014 Tony Romo to me. Who knows, maybe sitting out gave his body the time he needed to fully heel. Who knows, maybe being replaced and watching from the sidelines sparked a bigger fire than he already had? This guy is a winner and is clutch. He can get the ball out of his hands fast and he can spread the ball around as well as stretch the field. This guy has a brain and knows what color uniform his team is wearing. He throws TD's not INT's! If Barkley can have the bears offense looking decent, imagine what a QB like Romo could do?

That cost Dallas a playoff game!

#Clutch

Lord have mercy

Romo has a career win percentage of .614, I would consider that a winner? Cutler's is .489.
http://larrybrownsports.com/football/to ... ats/274248" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[G08]

Dude started 127 games in 10 seasons and is 2-4 in the playoffs, getting bounced out in the first game twice, and only winning one game the other two times.

Not my definition of a "clutch winner"

I think of Ben Roethlisberger as a clutch winner, Tom Brady (vomit) as a clutch winner, Aaron Rodgers (double vomit) as a clutch winner, etc. One of the biggest knocks on Romo was that he shit the bed in the playoffs or in games leading up to qualifying for them. Which is not to take away from him as a QB... I always was a fan of his from afar.

[mmmc_35]

I think Romo is being a little dressed down by saying he is a likeable version of Cutler. This board has been pro Cutler for a while. So I think some of that talk is rose colored glasses.

The only way Romo makes sense is if you draft a young QB. The better off with Hoyer thing... It completely depends. I would rather a rookie study under Romo. You have no idea Romo's health (though I think he should retire). His cap hit shouldn't be a ton, at least I don't think it should, and couldn't they keep Hoyer too? I don't think any one rookie QB should start this season. Ever. Not even if there was a fire.

Now I just don't think it will happen, nor do I necessary want it.

[G08]

If Romo is cut, I wouldn't mind kicking the tires if he's cheap. I'd much prefer him to freaking Brian Hoyer.

[mmmc_35]

If Romo is cut, I wouldn't mind kicking the tires if he's cheap. I'd much prefer him to freaking Brian Hoyer.

Oh yeah a significant trade makes no logical sense.

[G08]

If Romo is cut, I wouldn't mind kicking the tires if he's cheap. I'd much prefer him to freaking Brian Hoyer.

Oh yeah a significant trade makes no logical sense.

That and a trade puts us on the hook for something like $19 million. Not interested.

If he came here for a fairly cheap deal, I can't see the harm in having him in the QB room with a high draft pick. Question is, though, why would he want to come here?

[mmmc_35]

After Denver, there is really just shit options for the guy, assuming he won't go to the Texans.

[Adipost]

LOL at anybody trying to compare Romo to Cutler.

[IotaNet]

Dude started 127 games in 10 seasons and is 2-4 in the playoffs, getting bounced out in the first game twice, and only winning one game the other two times.

Not my definition of a "clutch winner" ...

This is my deal right here. Even in perfect health and under 30, he's no panacea. He simply hasn't done enough to get me excited. When you put his advanced age and brittle bones into the mix, I don't think he's worth it.

[Funkster]

If Romo is cut, I wouldn't mind kicking the tires if he's cheap. I'd much prefer him to freaking Brian Hoyer.

Oh yeah a significant trade makes no logical sense.

That and a trade puts us on the hook for something like $19 million. Not interested.

If he came here for a fairly cheap deal, I can't see the harm in having him in the QB room with a high draft pick. Question is, though, why would he want to come here?

Now your starting to see the "realistic chance" and why it makes some sense!

I think you also found the bottom line question, why would he want to come to the Bears.

- Players seems to like playing for Fox.
- Very friendly QB system.
- Better than average O-line
- very strong running game
- With the signing of Jeffery a very promising WR corps
- A TE that has velcro mittens for hands

In general, a very cowboys like offense in terms of personnel.

Romo has always lacked a defense. This defense is a piece or 3 away from being a legit top unit. The bears could realistically fill those 3 pieces this off season.