Matt Schaub or Tony Romo

Yes and the Terry Glenn play was very bad for the Cowboys.

That said, the poster specifically argued that the Romo gaff was not important.

His response:

I have no problem saying the Glenn play was more important to the loss, but to say that Romo didn't chock or that fumbling the snap wasn't important is ludicrous and smacks of homerism.

Schaub's INT after Jacoby's long punt return on Sunday wasn't the only play that cost us the game, but no Texans fan in their right mind would argue that it wasn't an important play.

 

Tony Romo.

 

I am impressed with both players, bottom line.

Schaub is calm and in command, and does not appear to get easily flustered. He also has an aggressive, attacking mentality, a serious competitive streak, and a strong will to win. All of these things are things that the Texans have lacked form the QB position until this year.

Is Schaub perfect? No, not yet. He still lacks experience, but obviously that will come with time. The interception following the JJ return was an example of letting his aggressiveness get the better of his judgment. But those types of mistakes should diminish with more experience. He seems to clearly recognize and acknowledge his mistakes, which means that he should not repeat them too much.

I think it is impossible to be too optimistic about what he could bring to the Texans. There have been Superbowl champion teams who had qb's who were not as polished as Schaub already is.

Getting Schaub from Atl was an absolute steal - may even go down in NFL history as one of the all-time robberies of talent. We can only hope.

As for Romo, the thing which impresses me most about him is his touch - how the majority of his passes not only find the target, but find their target in such a perfect spot to allow the receiver to continue along his path without altering his stride at all. This is how you turn a 15 yard gain into a 60 yard gain. For an example, look at the touchdown to Hurd late in the Giants game. That was literally a perfect pass - it was downright Marino-like.

When trying to compare the way Romo moves in the pocket (to avoid defenders) to qb's in the past, names like Tarkenton, Staubach, even Steve Young come to mind. He avoids them without even seeming to look at them - his eyes never seem to stray from the receivers' movements downfield. So it's not just elusiveness or scrambling ability, it's that combined with the constant awareness of where his receivers are while he is eluding the defenders. It gives the offense the advantage, because the longer a play takes before the whistle blows, the more panicked the defenders become, especially when the qb is on the move out of the pocket.

I don't know that that quality in Romo is the sort of thing one can be taught - it appears to be just a sort of natural instinctiveness about his play. Once in a while a player will come along in a sport who just makes it all look too easy out there, like they are grownups playing with children. Romo has regularly made opposing defenders look silly. That's just something you're born with, hence the 'special' tag that people want to apply to him.

He's lucky to be in the situation he is in, also. Best o-line in the league, top-shelf offensive talent around him in Owens and Witten, as well as a very effective running combo in Jones and Barber. Plus, you have an extremely bright offensive mind in Garrett calling the plays, very Norv-Turner circa mid-90's Dallas.

So what will happen when things are not so rosy for him? When the time comes that he gets slowed by some injury, a concussion, or a knee, or something, which might hamper his strengths? Or when the receiving talent fades, or the O-line gets banged up. Will he be able to make others around him better through sheer will, like Elway or Favre have managed to do?

Maybe, we have not seen that particular kind of adversity yet. We have seen him deal with a horrific blunder and come through it intact, so the indicators are good.


What a sweet sweet thing it would be to see these two qb's face off in a few Superbowls.. oh man.

And as far as Romo 'losing' that playoff game last year, well, yes and no, mostly yes. However, not enough is made of the ridiculous decision by the refs to take away the first down by Witten (based upon ZERO video evidence by the way) which would have kept the field goal attempt from ever even needing to be tried. And Glenn's freak fumble hurt too. But the game is not about 'if's' and 'could-haves'.. It is only about what was. And what was was a victory turned into a defeat by a slick ball and a momentary lapse of focus.

But unlike someone like Lidge, who has let one terrible moment essentially rule his thoughts from that moment on, Romo shows to have done nothing but become an even better player.

It's good to be able to have true optimism for both Texas teams every Sunday, instead of just the one up north.

 

You ruined an essentially good post with this drivel. I can't believe still buy this rubbish.

How on earth do you know what Brad Lidge is thinking? Are you in his head? Do you have ESP? Are you his girlfriend?

It's been documented over and over (ad nauseum) that Lidge's struggles began before the Pujols bomb.

It sounds so stupid when people speak dogmatically of thinks over which they can't possibly have even a surface knowledge (like the "ruling thoughts" in the head of Brad Lidge).

Listen to everyone around Brad Lidge, and you'll get the truth about his demeanor and composure. He may not be a big-time closer, but his head is on right.

 

Well, whatever. I just go by results. Lidge may have had some 'troubles' before that Pujols bomb, but you cannot tell me he has ever been the same since. Sure, he has had some effective stretches, but it's in there, lurking around in his mind. How else to explain his results since? He thought he was invincible, bulletproof, and he mostly was. But Pujols put a crack in his armor, and that crack has never gone away yet. Maybe he will get back to where he was, someday.

And hey, I like Lidge. I am actually glad they didn't trade him away. I genuinely hope that he can once again become the asset that he used to be. But seriously - would you bet the same amount of money on him successfully closing out a close game as you would have bet before that bomb? I know I wouldn't.

 

Both have looked very good so far, but Romo has been damn near perfect. I think the fumbled snap was the best thing for Romo/Cowboys in that it probably humbled him a bit. I hate the Cowboys so it pains me to say this, but Romo looks great...some questioned whether he would bounce back after that faulty snap but he has come back even better.

Once again, I HATE the Cowboys but Romo has really impressed me this season. Schaub has been very good as well in only his couple starts...poise in the pocket and playmaking is something Texan fans haven't seen since..well...ever.

 

What's lurking around in Eric Gagne's mind? Or any number of guys who had one or two strong years as a closer and then came back to normal?

Lots of relief pitchers are flashes in the pan. The Wagners and Riveras of this world are rare and special indeed.

Here you go again knowing what another man--one you never met--thought. Are you God? If so, can you tell my boss to give me a raise, O Omniscient One?

Except that his struggles began earlier--which you readily admit yet somehow hold onto this myth as if it were fact. Unbelievable.

More than that, evidently you know him intimately. Since you can tell us everything he's thinking, and all.

There, fixed that one for ya.

Personally, I prefer to stick with good old reality, not myths carefully constructed from assumptions and wild-assed speculation. Your grasp of prose is decent, however; so you'd be a great writer for ESPN--blow past the facts, grab one highlight and spin a bunch of melodramatic BS for the readers. Well done indeed.

 

Ok, you obviously feel strongly about it, and I will freely admit that I am not a mind reader, nor do I know Lidge intimately.

However, I notice you didn't answer the question at the end. The proof is on the hot-dog, you know.

I know Lidge has been a supremely stand-up guy ever since, no question about it, and I admire him for it.

But I, just like thousands of other people, was watching that home playoff game against the Cards, the one which should have been the clincher in that series, and I saw with my own eyes exactly what Lidge did when Pujols hit that bomb. He did something I had never seen him do before. He collapsed, down into a squat, almost to his knees, and appeared stunned. It was obviously a terrible blow, and it clearly affected him deeply. You do not need to be a mind-reader to be able to understand this.

Perhaps he did begin to struggle before that. He never reacted like he reacted to Pujols' bomb. That one moment was the blow that we all saw, and we all saw how he reacted to it. A reasonably intelligent human being should be able to make inferences and draw some reasonable conclusions. Could they be wrong? Of course. But to make the assertion that you cannot know something about a person without having intimate knowledge of them is absurd. Was Hitler a bad man? How do you know? Were you there with him? Did you read his thoughts? See how silly that is?

Again, I understand and applaud Lidge for continuing to fight and claw and try. I hope he succeeds. He 'says' all the right things. And I know that there are several people around him who 'say' that his head is back where it needs to be.

But just like I tell my teenage daughter, it doesn't matter nearly as much what you *say* as what you *do*. Actions speak far louder than words. Results matter. There actually is a reason for the existence of the phrase 'perception is reality'.

Lidge lost his job this very season because he couldn't throw strikes and he couldn't get anybody out. His words may have said that his head was right, but his results did not.

Now maybe it is all just one huge coincidence. Maybe the Pujols bomb was merely a symptom of a decline in Lidge's ability/performance which had already happened. We will probably never know. But it seems rather far-fetched, compared to the much more likely (and understandable) scenario that Pujols simply planted the seeds of vulnerability and doubt with one fell swoop, and he has yet to get them out of there.

However, either way, the original point still stands (as this was a point about Romo after all). Lidge, for WHATEVER reason, has not reacted well to his adversity, when results are the sole judge. Romo has reacted well to his roughly equivalent blow of adversity - not just reacted well and overcome it, but actually improved. Lidge has come nowhere near even his previous levels of performance in the years prior to that one incident.

 

Because I'm sick of this type of bullcrap.

Yet you so willingly share what's going on in his head as if you knew.

It wasn't worth answering. The decline didn't start with the Pujols bomb, so the Pujols bomb doesn't matter. I don't have to answer to artificial BS myths.

Evidently you weren't watching the last couple weeks of the season, though.

I'm telling you, you should apply at ESPN. The drama. The sensationalism. You've got what it takes. It was the biggest game of his life. Of course he's going to feel the weight of a bad pitch like never before. How in the hell does that prove that he was "ruined for life" or that that bomb has been "ruling his thoughts" ever since? It doesn't. You do have to be a mind-reader to know this. Or, you could be a know-nothing fan like the rest of us making **** up.

A reasonably intelligent human being looks at the whole picture, not just one fantastic moment and ignoring the rest. For instance, what everyone around Lidge--you know, the people who would have a clue as to his frame of mind because they work with him day in and day out--has said.

If they're making stuff up based on what they perceived as a "collapse" and ignoring all the other mountains of evidence to the contrary, "they" most likely are wrong. To quote you, "any reasonably intelligent human being" should be able to grasp this basic concept.

Of course it is. Of course, that's not what I said. You claimed to know what he's thinking and to know his frame of mind. I call bull****. And, I'm right.

I see how stupid your example is. Do you know what was going on in Hitler's mind? Was he insane? Manic? Depressed? Possessed? We don't know what he was thinking. But we do know, based on what he did, that he was a bad man. The two things couldn't be any less related. Nice try, though.

Which, by the way, is a good clue as to his frame of mind. For reference, see Redding, Tim.

But by all means, don't believe them even though they work with him every day. We should believe you, because you saw him "collapse" on the TV and have "reasonably" extrapolated his every thought ever since based upon this sensational, life-changing event.

So, has he been "collapsing" on the field? Crying? You act as if a solid frame of mind would guarantee ultra-elite performance. That's ridiculous. Were Lidge able to keep up that pace he was on for ten years, he'd be a first-ballot hall of famer with dozens of all-time records. Just because he is now a normal pitcher doesn't mean he's a head case.

You seriously believe that perception is reality? There is a term for people whose only reality lies in their own perceptions and who refuse to think bigger and reach beyond themselves for information. The term is: delusional.

Or maybe he was trying a cutter and screwed up his mechanics. Then he dropped the cutter and threw quite nicely for most of the summer until a knee injury cut into his control. Nah, damn the facts, let's go for the sensational Collapse Epic!!

Again, (for the one millionth freaking time), it was prior to the last week of the regular season. How conveniently you ignore this simple fact.

Keep your delusional theory. It's your right to post it as opinion. And it's my right to say how stupid it is.

 

Hey bag on the pokes all you want but, leave the eye candy out of the discussion. They're just plain hot!

 

Right now, at this moment, I'd say there is no doubt - Tony Romo.

 

I don't know, there is something about Romo that makes me cautious. He may be one of the quarterbacks who plays well in the regular season, then just sux during the playoffs. Time will tell I guess.

 

Even if that is so, playing well during the regular season is step #1 that several QBs can't get past. So that isn't something to just be disregarded. With that said, we'll see how he does if the Cowboys make the playoffs.

 

I like your posts usually, so don't take this personally, but that paragraph may have been the greatest leap to conclusion through sensationalized appeal to pathos and empty rhetoric in the history of the Astros/Texans forum. That was just awful, man.

 

I didn't think many people actually bought that ESPN bullcrap that Lidge was a "headcase" because of that Pujols homer. Does anyone even remember that we WON that series?

 

You said that much better and succinctly than I. Well done.

And I like dude's posts usually, too.

 

Week 6 on CBS: New England at Dallas should provide some answers.

 

Both are good, but Romo is better...Went to the game and saw him in person for the first time and even though it was the Rams, he played great, as he has his previous 3 games...

I still feel the Texans can be competitve, despite losing 2 in a row, but Romo has the intangibles you want and can run and throw with accuracy...

 

I will be there with my popcorn...