No Mo Romo?

No Mo Romo?

By Holden Wilen

It has been a long time since I have written anything for this blog. Since my last post my life has changed quite bit. 

I graduated from Texas Tech University in Dec. 2012, and began my journey towards becoming a fulltime sports reporter. I am currently a reporter for the Montgomery County Sentinel, a position I have been in for almost a year now. While I may not be at the point I want to be at yet, I am grateful for the opportunities I have had and look forward to the future.

In the meantime, here I am trying to expand my online presence and get my voice out there by starting this blog back up again.

So there I am trying to think of what to write about and wouldn’t you know it, as I am brainstorming ideas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo takes over headlines for the 5,464,342nd time this season. This time the news is Romo may or may not be out for the season with a herniated disk. It became painfully obvious to me what I needed to write about: Tony Romo.

Reports are Romo is out for the season, but head coach Jason Garrett is calling him day to day, and owner Jerry Jones is doing his best to spread optimism, saying he hopes he can play on Sunday.

When I first heard the news about Romo’s injury the first thing I thought was, “Oh no.” As a Cowboys fan, I initially became worried about whether or not the Cowboys would now make the playoffs. The more I thought about Romo’s injury however, the more I realized it presents an opportunity.

First and foremost, the injury provides an opportunity for all of the Romo haters to see what happens when the team does not have the former undrafted free agent taking snaps under center. At the same time, the injury also provides an opportunity for vindication.

All the time haters take shots at Romo: “Romo the homo!” “Romo can’t get it done in the fourth quarter,” Romo doesn’t come through in the clutch.”

Well Romo haters, here is your chance to see what it is like when the Cowboys do not have Romo playing quarterback.

It seems to me Cowboys fans have a short memory. Do you not remember what it was like at the end of Troy Aikman’s career and after he retired?

Aikman retired in 2000 after being diagnosed with his seventh concussion. After he retired, the Cowboys went through a revolving door of quarterbacks ranging from embarrassing to mediocre. In total, the Cowboys started nine different quarterbacks between 2000-2006, when Romo took over the starting job.

The names on that list are a who’s who of mediocrity: a washed-up Randall Cunningham, Anthony Wright, Quincy Carter, Ryan Leaf, Clint Stoerner, Chad Hutchison, Vinny Testaverde, Drew Henson and Drew Bledsoe.

In total, these nine men combined for zero Pro Bowl appearances and one playoff berth (Carter in 2003).

For those of you who have forgotten how bad it was, let me indulge you with a refresher:

Between 2000-2006, the nine quarterbacks combined for 91 starts. In those starts they threw for 18,291 yards, 100 touchdowns and 110 interceptions, while completing only 53.3 percent of their passes. Great numbers, huh?

Oh and in case you were wondering, the Cowboys record in that time was 43-59. The Cowboys lost their lone playoff game in 2003 to the Carolina Panthers with Carter starting.

Then, in a 2006 Monday Night Football game against the New York Giants something happened.

The Cowboys had began the year 3-2, and looking like they were again headed for nowhere. Drew Bledsoe was starting and looking old. He was past his prime, had a slow release and virtually no mobility. The Giants’ pass rush was having a field day. With the team struggling, head coach Bill Parcells decided to make a change. He chose to put in an unknown, undrafted free agent from Eastern Illinois who was in his fourth year in the league as a backup on the team.

Though the Cowboys lost the game to the Giants, Romo showed something no quarterback had shown in more than a few years—he had shown a spark and an ability to make plays in and out of the pocket. Romo led the team to a 6-4 record down the stretch and into the playoffs as a wildcard. However, his story took a turn in the wildcard playoff game because as a placeholder on field goals, he botched the hold on what would have been a game-tying extra point with less than two minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. Instead of tying the game the Cowboys lost 21-20.

Romo has enjoyed success as a quarterback for the Cowboys, and it seems fans do not appreciate what he has accomplished.

We saw the numbers for the nine previous Cowboys quarterbacks. Compare those numbers to Romo’s: From 2006-2013 he has started 93 games. In those games he has thrown for 29,565 yards, 208 touchdowns and 101 interceptions while completing 64.6 percent of his passes.

Romo has thrown for more than 11,000 more yards than the other guys, more than doubled the number of touchdowns they threw, and thrown seven less interceptions! In addition, the Cowboys have a 68-52 record since Romo became the starter, won two division titles (2007 and 2009), and made four overall playoff appearances. Romo has also made the Pro Bowl three times.

Now here’s the bad—the Cowboys are only 1-3 in the playoffs with Romo, and are 1-6 in elimination games. Of course everyone remembers the botched hold, and the numerous interceptions Romo has thrown in the elimination games.

However, my point is without Romo the Cowboys do not even participate in elimination games. Romo at least gives the Cowboys a chance to win. Yes he makes mistakes (though not as many as people think he does), but he also makes plays. Maybe that is what makes him so frustrating.

Throughout the years the Cowboys have had some poor offensive lines. Romo has one of the quickest releases in the history of the league as well as a unique ability to escape pressure in the pocket. Without Romo under center, I think we would have seen a lot more turnovers and sacks during the last few seasons, and fewer completed passes and touchdowns.

I guess what it seems like to me is people see Romo’s talent and hold him to a higher standard than maybe I do. Perhaps I still have the expectations for quarterbacks I became accustomed to during 2000-2006, and am grateful every time I watch Romo make plays. Perhaps others are frustrated because they see Romo make incredible plays, and wonder why he can’t harness that ability 100 percent of the time, and more specifically “when it matters.”

I am with you all—I desperately want the Cowboys to be in the playoffs every year and I long for another Super Bowl title. However, I don’t think getting rid of Romo is the answer. Do I get frustrated when he throws a pick? Of course I do. But I also remember how we even got to the point that we are competing in a game.

In order to have success you need a quarterback. Why get rid of one who has done so well?

Instead of getting rid of Romo, why don’t the Cowboys go out and hire a coaching staff that will put an emphasis on making good decisions and cutting down penalties. The current coaching staff and previous staffs have not held players accountable for penalties.

Why don’t the Cowboys try and build a real defense? Sure there have been some talented players (Sean Lee, Demarcus Ware, Terence Newman) but all in all, the defense has not been good. This year’s ranks among the worst in NFL history.

Perhaps the real problem is the man on top—Jerry Jones.

For too long Jones has been the final decision maker for the Cowboys. What other owner goes down to the sidelines during games? What other owner is the general manager for his team? What other owner addresses the media after every single game, as if he is one of the players or a coach?

I believe Jones cares about the Cowboys and wants to win as badly as the rest of us do. The problem is he is getting in his own way.

I love that Jones spends money on free agents and is willing to make trades.

I just wish he would hire somebody to spend the money and make trades for him.

Romo has made mistakes, but he also gives the Cowboys a chance to win, even when the odds are against them. Now, with Romo injured, the haters have a chance to see what the team looks like with another guy under center, this time veteran backup Kyle Orton.

Since Romo became the starter in 2006, he has missed 13 games due to injury. In those games the Cowboys are 6-7. The quarterbacks have not been as bad as the 2000-2006 starters, but they have not been excellent either—throwing for 17 touchdowns, 17 interceptions and completing 62.8 percent of their passes.

Orton is not a bad quarterback—he has a 35-34 record as a starting quarterback—but he does not exude confidence, at least to me. Instead, I think about when Testaverde and Bledsoe were behind center—two guys who had enjoyed success in their careers, but were nearing retirement, did not have big-play ability, and were statues in the pocket.

Orton does not have the elusiveness Romo possesses, and behind this offensive line that presents a problem. The offense will not be able to put up the same numbers it does with Romo, which is a problem because the defense is still horrible.

Could the Cowboys win on Sunday against the Eagles? Sure, and I would be thrilled. But at the same time, don’t be shocked if the Eagles blow the Cowboys out. Do not be surprised if the offense has trouble making plays. Do not be surprised Orton gets sacked a lot and cannot get the ball down the field.

Romo may not be the best quarterback out there, and he is not Aikman or Roger Staubach, but he is still the guy I want to see leading the Cowboys until someone can find me a better option. I do not want to go back to having Ryan Leaf and Clint Stoerner starting for my team.

So as you are watching Sunday's game ask yourself this question: "Do we really want to go back to the days of Chad Hutchison and Anthony Wright?" If the Cowboys dump Romo, then I believe it will be like when someone breaks up with their girlfriend or boyfriend in a chick-flick and then realizes they made a mistake. You do not realize what you have until you do not have it anymore.

I do not want to be in that situation. I say keep Tony Romo around and support him.

I believe in you Tony, even if others do not.