Not that I'm endorsing Romo...far from it, but teams can now cut a player and designate him a June 1 cut, but not actually have to wait till June 1.malk wrote:That's if he's a June 1st cut and if so, most teams will have their QB situations sorted out.
ESPN: "Realistic Chance" of Tony Romo becoming a Bear
Moderator: wab
-
Atkins&Rebel
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2189
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:56 pm
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
I will kill you if you cut me at the knees. You will drink with me when invited and stay til I say so. We only listen to American Music. I make men nervous with just my presence. I expect an apology if you hold. I throw linemen at QB's. Believe the Lore!
-
Pagan
- MVP
- Posts: 1408
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:19 am
- Location: South Bend, Indiana
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
First.. let me just say No to the Tony Romo.... idea.Funkster wrote:Might wanna say Romo is AS fragile as Cutler. Remember Cutler only played 5 games this season. I can't argue that both QB's have had a hard time finishing a season. That's about where the similarities end. Nobody outside of Chicago would put Cutler in the same catergoy as Romo.Bears_40 wrote:IMO Romo is a fragile Cutler. Not going to the promised land with him.
2nd Calling either QB fragile is a lazy mistake.
3rd There are actually quite a few articles comparing the 2 QB's;
There's actually no logical reason to flippantly dismiss the comparisons between the 2 players= or their careers.
Most of their stat-lines: from physical attributes, pocket presence to career completions aren't extremely different.
☆ That is exactly what bothers me ☆
Why bring in a QB that is pretty historically similiar & also has 3 more NFL years of wear and tear on his body?
He's (36 yes old) recovering from back injury, not just a reg everyday back injury... but a crushed vertebrae injury.
Also... Romo has played with some of the best O-Lines during his 13 years.
= His QB #'s should look much more impressive than they do.
So.... yeah.
No thanks
-
Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7412
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 586 times
- Been thanked: 1039 times
Adipost wrote:
19.6 over 2 seasons.
-
DaSuperfan
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 996
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 2:44 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
I think Denver would be a team in the mix too, which would be a much more attractive destination than any of those locations listed above.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
Never Die Easy
Denver already has 2 QB's and a shit offensive line.DaSuperfan wrote:I think Denver would be a team in the mix too, which would be a much more attractive destination than any of those locations listed above.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
Since 2011Pagan wrote:First.. let me just say No to the Tony Romo.... idea.Funkster wrote:Might wanna say Romo is AS fragile as Cutler. Remember Cutler only played 5 games this season. I can't argue that both QB's have had a hard time finishing a season. That's about where the similarities end. Nobody outside of Chicago would put Cutler in the same catergoy as Romo.Bears_40 wrote:IMO Romo is a fragile Cutler. Not going to the promised land with him.
2nd Calling either QB fragile is a lazy mistake.
3rd There are actually quite a few articles comparing the 2 QB's;
There's actually no logical reason to flippantly dismiss the comparisons between the 2 players= or their careers.
Most of their stat-lines: from physical attributes, pocket presence to career completions aren't extremely different.
☆ That is exactly what bothers me ☆
Why bring in a QB that is pretty historically similiar & also has 3 more NFL years of wear and tear on his body?
He's (36 yes old) recovering from back injury, not just a reg everyday back injury... but a crushed vertebrae injury.
Also... Romo has played with some of the best O-Lines during his 13 years.
= His QB #'s should look much more impressive than they do.
So.... yeah.
No thanks
Romo has missed 23 games
Cutler has missed 25 games
Romo has thrown 130 TD's
Cutler has thrown 98TD's
Romo has thrown 55 interceptions
Cutler has thrown 67 interceptions
Romo has a rating of 102.7
Cutler has a rating of 85.8
Romo has been selected to 4 Pro Bowls
Cutler has been selected to 1 Pro Bowl
Romo coming back from back injury/surgery
Cutler coming back from torn labrum in throwing arm
I could keep on going but you get the point!
Like I said Romo's health is a huge question mark but if he checks out healthy, it would be crazy not to explore him as a serious option. And when you look at teams he could realistically land on, the bears have to be on the short list. I'm not saying Romo is the ideal solution but he very well could be a viable solution for the QB predicament the bears find themselves in? IMO, this is the Bears situation, no franchise QB, a solid back up that has proven he can fill in for a time and produce but is a FA(Hoyer), possibly draft a QB in a draft class that doesn't have a QB that screams franchise player. I just can't see Fox putting his job on the line with a drafted QB. This leads me to believe we're going to see some type of established vet brought in.
“Protect this fucking house, go all out, leave that shit out on the field, let’s have some fun, makes some plays baby ” Mitch Trubisky #believethesleeve
Great post!!! Also, as far as his back surgery:Funkster wrote:Since 2011Pagan wrote:First.. let me just say No to the Tony Romo.... idea.Funkster wrote:Might wanna say Romo is AS fragile as Cutler. Remember Cutler only played 5 games this season. I can't argue that both QB's have had a hard time finishing a season. That's about where the similarities end. Nobody outside of Chicago would put Cutler in the same catergoy as Romo.Bears_40 wrote:IMO Romo is a fragile Cutler. Not going to the promised land with him.
2nd Calling either QB fragile is a lazy mistake.
3rd There are actually quite a few articles comparing the 2 QB's;
There's actually no logical reason to flippantly dismiss the comparisons between the 2 players= or their careers.
Most of their stat-lines: from physical attributes, pocket presence to career completions aren't extremely different.
☆ That is exactly what bothers me ☆
Why bring in a QB that is pretty historically similiar & also has 3 more NFL years of wear and tear on his body?
He's (36 yes old) recovering from back injury, not just a reg everyday back injury... but a crushed vertebrae injury.
Also... Romo has played with some of the best O-Lines during his 13 years.
= His QB #'s should look much more impressive than they do.
So.... yeah.
No thanks
Romo has missed 23 games
Cutler has missed 25 games
Romo has thrown 130 TD's
Cutler has thrown 98TD's
Romo has thrown 55 interceptions
Cutler has thrown 67 interceptions
Romo has a rating of 102.7
Cutler has a rating of 85.8
Romo has been selected to 4 Pro Bowls
Cutler has been selected to 1 Pro Bowl
Romo coming back from back injury/surgery
Cutler coming back from torn labrum in throwing arm
I could keep on going but you get the point!
Like I said Romo's health is a huge question mark but if he checks out healthy, it would be crazy not to explore him as a serious option. And when you look at teams he could realistically land on, the bears have to be on the short list. I'm not saying Romo is the ideal solution but he very well could be a viable solution for the QB predicament the bears find themselves in? IMO, this is the Bears situation, no franchise QB, a solid back up that has proven he can fill in for a time and produce but is a FA(Hoyer), possibly draft a QB in a draft class that doesn't have a QB that screams franchise player. I just can't see Fox putting his job on the line with a drafted QB. This leads me to believe we're going to see some type of established vet brought in.
www.bloggingtheboys.com/2016/8/28/12681172/a-doctor-s-take-on-tony-romo-s-back-no-permanent-damage-no-surgery-fine-to-play-again
-
DaSuperfan
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 996
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 2:44 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
Lynch is still unproven and Siemian is far from a polished starter. They still have a stellar defense and their OL issues can be upgraded in the offseason. I think Romo would be a good fit there as a 1-2 year stopgap until Lynch is fully ready. JMHO.Adipost wrote:Denver already has 2 QB's and a shit offensive line.DaSuperfan wrote:I think Denver would be a team in the mix too, which would be a much more attractive destination than any of those locations listed above.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
Never Die Easy
-
thunderspirit
- Head Coach
- Posts: 3932
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
- Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
- Has thanked: 640 times
- Been thanked: 648 times
You forgot: stay in Dallas since it actually costs them more this year to cut him than to keep him.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
That's what I think happens.
KFFL refugee.
dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
-
wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29995
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 134 times
- Been thanked: 2066 times
I also think he restructures and stays in Dallas. He loves it here, knows his time as a starter in the NFL is probably done. He's always said that he doesn't want to do what Emmett Smith did.thunderspirit wrote:You forgot: stay in Dallas since it actually costs them more this year to cut him than to keep him.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
That's what I think happens.
-
malk
- Head Coach
- Posts: 3635
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
- Has thanked: 134 times
- Been thanked: 210 times
It would be sensible, he certainly doesn't need the money and the hassle of moving across the country. There isn't an obvious ring chase spot either.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
-
Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7412
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 586 times
- Been thanked: 1039 times
here's a goofy take that i just thought of:wab wrote:I also think he restructures and stays in Dallas. He loves it here, knows his time as a starter in the NFL is probably done. He's always said that he doesn't want to do what Emmett Smith did.thunderspirit wrote:You forgot: stay in Dallas since it actually costs them more this year to cut him than to keep him.Adipost wrote:Romo doesn't have many options.CRM 114 wrote:Why would Romo want to come here? He would want to go somewhere where he can compete for a championship.
- Buffalo
- NY Jets
- Chicago
That's what I think happens.
-romo loves golf, and is pretty good at it.
-tiger wood's is getting destroyed by his multiple back surgeries.
-sooo maybe it is super realistic that romo would like to ride out his last few years holding a clipboard and preserving his health. i'm not questioning his drive or anything like that. but dudes made a few hundred million between salary and endorsements already. why not just focus on your whole golf thing. the whole "this team is a qb away from the superbowl" dream never works out anyway.
as of this very moment i'm on the romo restructures and enjoys being the best backup in the league bandwagon.
Well...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
“Protect this fucking house, go all out, leave that shit out on the field, let’s have some fun, makes some plays baby ” Mitch Trubisky #believethesleeve
-
Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7412
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 586 times
- Been thanked: 1039 times
i wanna believe, though.mmmc_35 wrote:I doubt a person as competitive as a starting NFL QB would choose to take a pay cut, to not play.
-
Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7412
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 586 times
- Been thanked: 1039 times
RustyTrombone wrote:i wanna believe, though.mmmc_35 wrote:I doubt a person as competitive as a starting NFL QB would choose to take a pay cut, to not play.
incontrovertible proof?
http://www.cbssports.com/golf/news/tony ... -golf-pro/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
incontrovertible proof.
-
mmmc_35
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6121
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:25 am
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 99 times
Believe away. As you said he is a really good golfer (scratch golfer). He is also a good BBall player. Maybe he can get those competitive juices out golfing and in pick up games at the Y.RustyTrombone wrote:i wanna believe, though.mmmc_35 wrote:I doubt a person as competitive as a starting NFL QB would choose to take a pay cut, to not play.
-
Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7412
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 586 times
- Been thanked: 1039 times
i 100% concede that 100% of the time the whole "maybe ultra competitive qb will be ok taking a backseat" thing never happens. Not when there's a QB starved team out there who'd go 5-11 instead of 2-14 with him at the helm.mmmc_35 wrote:Believe away. As you said he is a really good golfer (scratch golfer). He is also a good BBall player. Maybe he can get those competitive juices out golfing and in pick up games at the Y.RustyTrombone wrote:i wanna believe, though.mmmc_35 wrote:I doubt a person as competitive as a starting NFL QB would choose to take a pay cut, to not play.
Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:Get ready to be pissed off.ysleblanc wrote:Bears getting Romo would piss me off, even more so if they have up a pick for him.
Dumb management 101.
It's not much but he still can spin the ball and move in the pocket.
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“Protect this fucking house, go all out, leave that shit out on the field, let’s have some fun, makes some plays baby ” Mitch Trubisky #believethesleeve
Yeah, signing Romo just wouldn't make much sense...but not signing Jeffery will piss off a lot of fansBearDen wrote:Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:Get ready to be pissed off.ysleblanc wrote:Bears getting Romo would piss me off, even more so if they have up a pick for him.
Dumb management 101.
Romo makes the most sense if you want to sit your rookie QB for a season.gpphat wrote:Yeah, signing Romo just wouldn't make much sense...but not signing Jeffery will piss off a lot of fansBearDen wrote:Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:Get ready to be pissed off.ysleblanc wrote:Bears getting Romo would piss me off, even more so if they have up a pick for him.
Dumb management 101.
What's the point of that? What would the Bears gain from sitting a rookie QB for a season accomplish? Draft Watson, start him from day 1Adipost wrote:Romo makes the most sense if you want to sit your rookie QB for a season.gpphat wrote:Yeah, signing Romo just wouldn't make much sense...but not signing Jeffery will piss off a lot of fansBearDen wrote:Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:Get ready to be pissed off.ysleblanc wrote:Bears getting Romo would piss me off, even more so if they have up a pick for him.
Dumb management 101.
Unless you think John Fox has absolutely no influence in the Bears organization, they are not starting a rookie next year.gpphat wrote:What's the point of that? What would the Bears gain from sitting a rookie QB for a season accomplish? Draft Watson, start him from day 1Adipost wrote:Romo makes the most sense if you want to sit your rookie QB for a season.gpphat wrote:Yeah, signing Romo just wouldn't make much sense...but not signing Jeffery will piss off a lot of fansBearDen wrote:Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:Get ready to be pissed off.ysleblanc wrote:Bears getting Romo would piss me off, even more so if they have up a pick for him.
Dumb management 101.
If they draft a QB with their first round pick, there is no way Fox doesn't start the rookie and keep his jobAdipost wrote:Unless you think John Fox has absolutely no influence in the Bears organization, they are not starting a rookie next year.gpphat wrote:What's the point of that? What would the Bears gain from sitting a rookie QB for a season accomplish? Draft Watson, start him from day 1Adipost wrote:Romo makes the most sense if you want to sit your rookie QB for a season.gpphat wrote:Yeah, signing Romo just wouldn't make much sense...but not signing Jeffery will piss off a lot of fansBearDen wrote:Not happening. The Romo part anyway, though I'm sure the Bears will do something to piss fans off as per usual.Adipost wrote:
Get ready to be pissed off.