Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

CanadianSkin · 01-02-2007, 01:13 PM

Here is a little comment on the subject from ESPN. Looks like not everyone there thinks he is the second coming. I totally agree with Gregg Easterbrook on this one.

" Romo: From Zero to Hero to 56 Percent All-Pro: Perennially, Tuesday Morning Quarterback complains that the Pro Bowl voting is a popularity contest, not an attempt to determine who's had the best seasons. One indicator is that voting closes after 14 games -- why don't the final two games count? Because voting closes after 88 percent of the action, TMQ calls the chosen the 88 Percent All-Pros. Pro Bowl absurdity reached new lows last month, as Tony Romo was chosen as an NFC quarterback despite his having a career total of nine games on the day voting closed. That made Romo a 56 Percent All Pro. Sure, the NFC is weak at quarterback, and Romo looked swell in several of those nine games. But would anyone have voted for Tony after watching his 10th outing? Hard upon being awarded a free ticket to Hawaii, in his 10th outing Romo led the Cowboys to just seven points at home against Philadelphia in a game that cost Dallas control of the NFC East, in the process recording a quarterback rating of 45.5, which is only slightly better than the rating you get for hurling the ball into the ground on every play. (If every pass clangs to the ground incomplete, an NFL quarterback gets a 39.6 rating.) In his next game, Romo again lost at home, this time to woeful Detroit, and his two careless fumbles were the game's decisive plays. Naming a guy who has played only nine games in his career to the Pro Bowl roster is a satire of the superficiality of Pro Bowl voting. Had Pro Bowl voting had closed after the 16th game, rather than the 14th, there's no way Romo would be Hawaii-bound. Thanks, Tony, for immediately proving my point on national television.
Romo note: All that media froth about the astonishingly unstoppable Romo was based on his first few games, when defenses seemed to relax for him and beginner's luck was in play. For the month of December, Romo finished with eight interceptions, seven fumbles and a pedestrian 77.1 passer rating.
Hawaii note: One reason voters "reached" for a gent who had played only nine games is that the Pro Bowl takes three quarterbacks; Romo was the third chosen. Annually a total of seven running backs and quarterbacks are sent to Hawaii from each conference, along with a total of eight offensive linemen. In football, there are twice as many offensive linemen as quarterbacks and running backs on the field. This means quarterbacks and running backs are significantly overrepresented at the Pro Bowl, compared to offensive linemen. Why wasn't the slot awarded to Romo as third quarterback instead granted to Jamar Nesbit of New Orleans or Ruben Brown of Chicago, blockers who've had Pro Bowl-caliber seasons and were shut out by the event's bias against offensive linemen?"

01-02-2007, 01:13 PM	#67
CanadianSkin Special Teams Join Date: May 2006 Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada Age: 49 Posts: 226	Re: Who is Tony Romo? Here is a little comment on the subject from ESPN. Looks like not everyone there thinks he is the second coming. I totally agree with Gregg Easterbrook on this one. " Romo: From Zero to Hero to 56 Percent All-Pro: Perennially, Tuesday Morning Quarterback complains that the Pro Bowl voting is a popularity contest, not an attempt to determine who's had the best seasons. One indicator is that voting closes after 14 games -- why don't the final two games count? Because voting closes after 88 percent of the action, TMQ calls the chosen the 88 Percent All-Pros. Pro Bowl absurdity reached new lows last month, as Tony Romo was chosen as an NFC quarterback despite his having a career total of nine games on the day voting closed. That made Romo a 56 Percent All Pro. Sure, the NFC is weak at quarterback, and Romo looked swell in several of those nine games. But would anyone have voted for Tony after watching his 10th outing? Hard upon being awarded a free ticket to Hawaii, in his 10th outing Romo led the Cowboys to just seven points at home against Philadelphia in a game that cost Dallas control of the NFC East, in the process recording a quarterback rating of 45.5, which is only slightly better than the rating you get for hurling the ball into the ground on every play. (If every pass clangs to the ground incomplete, an NFL quarterback gets a 39.6 rating.) In his next game, Romo again lost at home, this time to woeful Detroit, and his two careless fumbles were the game's decisive plays. Naming a guy who has played only nine games in his career to the Pro Bowl roster is a satire of the superficiality of Pro Bowl voting. Had Pro Bowl voting had closed after the 16th game, rather than the 14th, there's no way Romo would be Hawaii-bound. Thanks, Tony, for immediately proving my point on national television. Romo note: All that media froth about the astonishingly unstoppable Romo was based on his first few games, when defenses seemed to relax for him and beginner's luck was in play. For the month of December, Romo finished with eight interceptions, seven fumbles and a pedestrian 77.1 passer rating. Hawaii note: One reason voters "reached" for a gent who had played only nine games is that the Pro Bowl takes three quarterbacks; Romo was the third chosen. Annually a total of seven running backs and quarterbacks are sent to Hawaii from each conference, along with a total of eight offensive linemen. In football, there are twice as many offensive linemen as quarterbacks and running backs on the field. This means quarterbacks and running backs are significantly overrepresented at the Pro Bowl, compared to offensive linemen. Why wasn't the slot awarded to Romo as third quarterback instead granted to Jamar Nesbit of New Orleans or Ruben Brown of Chicago, blockers who've had Pro Bowl-caliber seasons and were shut out by the event's bias against offensive linemen?" __________________ HTTR from North of the 49th!!!!! Two things I love.... Canada and the Redskins!!!!