Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Tuesday A.M. Quickie:
Cowboys' QB Controversy
Do You Like Romo or Bledsoe?

Cowboys QB controversy: Bill Parcells was obviously sick of Drew Bledsoe, so he went to Tony Romo, and I think that's where he'll stay.

Romo played the entire second half and finished with 227 yards (14/25), with 2 TDs to go with 3 INTs and 2 sacks. In the first half, Bledsoe had 111 yards (7/12) with 4 sacks and 1 INT (the one that presumably got him benched).

Who would you play? Considering that this was Romo's first real sustained game action of his entire career, he obviously flashed enough upside to warrant more starts.

That Bledsoe was basically benched for an INT that happened because he didn't throw to T.O. -- and that one of Romo's TDs actually went to T.O. -- I think is symbolism for Parcells' short-term decision-making.

LaVar Arrington out for season: Perhaps karmic payback for the griping and moaning he did last season with the Redskins?

Matt Hasselbeck out 3 weeks with that knee injury: And the post-Super Bowl jinx continues for the Seahawks...

Shawne Merriman will appeal his 4-game steroids suspension. Good luck with that.

Dennis Green's job coaching the Cardinals is safe... for now. Sounds like the team execs are tired of "woulda, coulda, shoulda."

Joe Girardi pulls out as a candidate for the Nats managerial job. Is he going back to the Yankees to work under Torre for a year before taking THAT job?

New NBA ball is here to stay: So says David Stern. Some might compare this to last year's dress-code controversy (which turned out to be a non-issue after preseason yapping similar to the new ball), but here's how it's different: The new ball actually could hurt game play. If that happens – and it markedly affects his product – Stern might U-turn.

Crazy NorCol punter surrenders: Would make a wild "ripped-from-the-headlines" story on "Law and Order": Could a jury convict this guy for attempted MURDER?

Remind me not to pull a gun on my kid's youth-league coach when he isn't getting enough playing time. Cripes: What a nutbag.

Finally, I'd say one of the more interesting non-traditional opinion columns you'll find is from Pat Tillman's brother, Kevin, which has gone fully mainstream in the last 24 hours.

I'm curious how unwavering supporters of this administration who double as the same football fans who respect Pat Tillman feel about the contradiction. Here's the link.

-- D.S.

41 comments:

Brave Sir Robin said...

I don't care about the Cowboys enough to have an opinion, but I do know we HOWLED when Romo threw that first pick.

If I HAD to choose, I'd pick Romo. He looks like he'll be just as bad as Bledsoe, only everyone has been calling for him. So, it'll be fun to see their fanbase destroy themselves

The heroin sheik said...

Romo sure looked better last night but then again bledsoe sucks donkey cock so of course Romo looked better.

The punter is going to fry onl ybecause of how messed up the legal system is. I had friend who about 13 yrs ago was walking home form the bar after a solid morning of shots. He stopped to talk to a man about a mule and because someone saw him from the window of their office andcalled the cops He got arrested before he finished walking to his apt. His crime lewd and liscivious conduct to a child because a kid saw him taking a piss. I guess it is true if you shake it more than once you are playing with it.

Can you blame Girardi? What franchise would you rather work for. Frankensteinbrenner might be an annoying and meddlesome owner but at least he does what it takes to at least try to win whereas the nats are cheapskates and I just don't see that changing.

Just curious bu who do you guys think is the best owner in sports.

Jeff (Cleveland) said...

I realize this has no bearing on the Romo/Bledsoe debate (at least Romo can run, that's about my only thought on that), but hooray for the Browns finally firing Carthon as their offensive coordinator. At least he lived up the the offensive part. His playcalling stunk.

rafael said...

Good read from Tillman. But it's too honest and makes too much sense.


Cowboys should get Charlie Batch.

I am suffering from sports apathy...all of my teams are hurting.
1-6 Redhawks
2-4-1 Blue Jackets
2-4 Steelers
Reds choked playoffs away.

I need a few turn arounds!

rafael said...

Best owner? In what terms?

Gary said...

I feel bad for Drew Bledsoe, he just keeps getting pushed out for the next "best" thing.

Bledsoe is a legit Hall of Fame candidate (you can even make the argument he is more legit than the guy who got his ring last night, Troy Aikman). Look at his career stats, he was THE man in New England. He was the second best (behind Farve) QB in the league for a span of 5 or 6 years.

It's a shame how he's been treated in his subsuquent stops after Foxborough, and more of a shame that his offensive lines suck.

Yeah, Romo is faster, and Drew is getting on in years, but give Bledsoe legit time in the pocket and he can still sling it.

That being said, I love the Giants, hate the Cowboys and was glad to see Romo blow the game.

This QB controversary is overshadowing one thing that otherwise would be the biggest story from the game...TO was probably the biggest reason the Boys lost. If he catches that 4th and 2, Dallas has all sorts of momentum and could possibly score and get within 3.

Sorry for the long post

Dan Mega said...

No offense Mr. Shanoff but I really wish this blog would stay out of the political realm. I want sports, sports, sports!

I'd pick Romo over Bledsoe.

I'm still wondering if the MLB is truely "covering-up" the Rogers "odd smudge" incident. It wouldn't be beyond Uncle Bud and the MLB cronies. They did, in fact, cover up steroids to bring baseball back to life in the late 90's (as did the Chicago Tribune with Sosa and the Cubs- they blamed it all on the Sox fans as usual).

I'm wondering what Merriman is thinking. Obviously, the NFL is going to make an example out of him. And rightly so.

I think Stern probably has financial interests with the new game ball. The players still hate it. Let the players decide what kind of ball they will use. Unfortunetly, the NBA union is in the front office's back pocket, so it won't do anything about it.

Finally, I'm wondering if Girardi is considering going to Oakland. It would be the biggest mistake of his career. The problem with Oakland is that the manager is just a pawn of Billy Beane. You know, the "genious" that consistently gets to the playoffs with a lower payroll. Not to mention the fact that A)the A's play in a pretty weak division besides the Angels and B)teams with lesser payrolls have won titles during Beane's tenure.

Too bad that Baseball Prospectus has deluded the common fan into thinking this man is a genious. And if anyone wants to argue further, let me say this.

World Series Titles:
Kenny Williams 1
Billy Beane 0

Jake C said...

So NO credit or mention of how the Giants manhandled teh Cowboys IN Dallas for their 1st ever win on Monday night in Dallas? Seriously?

That's fine. Everyone has been down on the Giants all year and were so quick to trash them after the brutal 3 game opening stretch. Now, they beat 3 (predicted) playoff teams (impressively) and no one still mentions how they are legitimate Super Bowl contenders.

Ah, well...it more fun to stick it in the face of doubters anyway.

RevScottDeMangeMD said...

Rafael...where in Ohio are you from? If you like the Reds...how on earth can you like the Steelers? I oughtta punch you right in the baby maker for that one. That being said...the Redhawks blooooooooooow (what year did you graduate?). But Ohio State rules the world and everyone knows that God wears a sweater vest.

nyc-steelers fan said...

The biggest problem with the boys is their offensive line. But watching the game, the giants were better in every aspect, and no QB likely would have won that game for the cowboys. So who cares? THe only thing is, while the Gints are better, the boys still have a prayer for the playoffs, and I think going with the rookie will ultimately cost you a game or two you otherwise might have won. This is only justified if you really think you have your QB of the future (which is why it's okay for the Cards to go with leinart and the Titans to go with Young). Maybe Romo is the future, but I don't think it's obvious.

But screw football. Thanks for the link to Tillman's piece. I understand danmega's implore, because I hate politics too, mainly because I hate politicians, but it is important to realize that there is some screwed up shit going down, and we can't just bury our heads in the sands. Kevin Tillman for President, '08, on the independent ticket!

Kevin said...

Best owner in sports?

The public - owners of the Green Bay Packers.

Richard said...

When Warner was the starter in Arizona, there was a great line about why Leinart should start:

"If the quarterback is making rookie mistakes, I'd rather play the rookie."

Same thing applies with Bledsoe. (I know Romo isn't technically a rookie, but he's a first time starter.)

Kevin said...

Best owner in sports?

The public - owners of the Green Bay Packers.

Hisjazziness said...

Best owners - the Rooney family, Mark Cuban

rafael said...

Revscott

lol Yes, the Redhawks suck at football this year. Hockey is #7 in the nation though! Woo

I was a Braves fan from 88-94..i left baseball after the strike. I hated the McGuire-Sosa thing in 98, but the Reds fun run in 99 brought me back. Reds fan since then (I always liked Pete Rose too).
Not a native Ohioan...don't wear Scarlet and Gray colored glasses.
I follow the Steelers because the best quarterback to come out of a college (yeah, Miami U...not tOSU)in the state of Ohio plays for the Steelers. hehe
Browns suck, Bengals aren't far behind. There ya go.

Steve said...

Regarding Pat Tillman, if you're stupid enough to join the army and trust your life to the crooks and liars in Washington, well then you might just die. My favorite saying is "If there were no soldiers, there'd be no war."

Horatio said...

So Owens traded Gracia for McNabb for Bledsoe for Romo.

Be careful for what you ask for, you just might get it.

Is it really Bledsoe's fault? Guy has low mobility but team can't block!!! Not all of those sacks were Bledsoes fault and that Safety, wow, I was wondering why Giants didnt just call same blitz every time until Dallas figured out a way to stop it. Whod think a known-blitzing LB who creeps up to line may, I dunno BLITZ!!!

GuyInTheCorner said...

Dan Mega-

Are you a white sox fan by any chance???

after these two quotes:
"They did, in fact, cover up steroids to bring baseball back to life in the late 90's (as did the Chicago Tribune with Sosa and the Cubs- they blamed it all on the Sox fans as usual)."
and:
"World Series Titles:
Kenny Williams 1
Billy Beane 0"
i'm not sure i know if you're a sox fan

and by the way im no Billy Bean fan or mathamatician but the year the White Sox won the series they had a payroll of $75,178,000 with a a median of $2,000,000 and the A's had a $55,425,762 with a mean of $591,667 so...
and this year the white sox missed the playoffs with a $102,750,667 and a mean of $2,325,000 while the A's swept into the ALCS with a payroll of $62,243,079 and a median of $800,000

and your profile says you're from chicago, i just couldn't figure out if you were a white sox fan or not

GuyInTheCorner said...

Dan Mega-

Are you a white sox fan by any chance???

after these two quotes:
"They did, in fact, cover up steroids to bring baseball back to life in the late 90's (as did the Chicago Tribune with Sosa and the Cubs- they blamed it all on the Sox fans as usual)."
and:
"World Series Titles:
Kenny Williams 1
Billy Beane 0"
i'm not sure i know if you're a sox fan

and by the way im no Billy Bean fan or mathamatician but the year the White Sox won the series they had a payroll of $75,178,000 with a a median of $2,000,000 and the A's had a $55,425,762 with a mean of $591,667 so...
and this year the white sox missed the playoffs with a $102,750,667 and a mean of $2,325,000 while the A's swept into the ALCS with a payroll of $62,243,079 and a median of $800,000

and your profile says you're from chicago, i just couldn't figure out if you were a white sox fan or not

ChrTh said...

My favorite saying is "If there were no soldiers, there'd be no war."

Yeah, good luck with that. You realize the US Military has only been voluntary for 30 years, right?

As for Pat Tillman/Administration support, etc., I don't see the disconnect that Dan is insinuating. Tillman is admired because he was living what many would consider the good life and gave that up to his defend his country. Tillman's actions were specifically for the response of 9/11, and what has happened since does not change that.

As for Kevin Tillman, the problem with this as well as the countless other similar diatribes made by people who don't have famous brothers is that it doesn't really change anything. Bush ain't going anywhere until January 20th, 2009, and electing Democrats in November ain't going to change that. In fact, if the Democrats win overwhelmingly this fall, don't be surprised if they overplay their hand and lose in 2008 a la 1994/1996. And anyone who thinks there's a substantial difference between Democrats and Republicans is drunk or high or something. The only real choice is to vote third party, but as Kodos said: Go ahead, throw away your vote!

Todd Ching said...

I'm really surprised that Tillman's brother's story hasn't gotten more publicity. Originally ESPN.com linked it at as just saying that he "broke the silence", and didn't mention on the front page that he was speaking out against the war. Not sure if that's because a lot of the sports-buffs are traditionally considered right-leaning or what.

Still though, anytime a former soldier and family of one speaks out against the war, we should listen. Who would know better, after all?

The problem is Dan Mega, that people don't pay enough attention to things like this, which actually affect the life and death of people like Pat Tillman. If people had paid enough attention in the first place, they would have realized what a terrible idea it was to go into Iraq, especially with the overconfidence and lack of an exit strategy...

To tie it into sports, would anyone expect that Michigan would be greeted as liberators if they conquered Ohio St? I think not.

big.aaron said...

Pat Bowlen

ChrTh said...


To tie it into sports, would anyone expect that Michigan would be greeted as liberators if they conquered Ohio St? I think not.


Well, they would've when John Cooper was coach. But if they had put John L. Smith in charge instead of Jim Tressel, then I imagine by now the Buckeye fans would be in open revolt.

Richard said...

Gary,

Bledsoe a hall of famer? I agree he has good numbers. However, I'm not sure you can make too good a hall of fame case for a guy whose team got better once he was gone. Vinny Testaverde has better career numbers, but he certainly wouldnt have a legit case.

Dan Mega said...

nyc-steeler and todd ching:

Its not that I don't care about the issues. Trust me, I do. However, since this is a sports blog with a comments section, the ramifications of including political discussion could start a terrible flame-fest between people like us who post the comments.

For example, what if Mr. Shanoff and posted his views on abortion and why?

Its his blog and he should run it how he sees fit. I'm just putting in my two cents. =)

guyinthecorner-

I thought the disparity between the Sox payroll and the A's payroll wasn't that big so thank you for correcting me on it.

I guess I'm still a little peeved at Beane for his comments regarding Kenny Williams in his book. Regardless, Williams still got the last laugh.

And yes, I'm definitely a White Sox fan.

Jon said...

Is it too late to change up the Monday Night football gang? ESPN would have been much better off leaving their Sunday night crew together. They had good chemistry and were easy to listen to. The 3 guys they have now are kind of painful to listen to.

That and they need to lose the in game interview. I don't care how many times people ask Hank Williams if he's ready for some football.

Hende said...

Feelings of the Iraq invasion aside, Pat Tillman died in Afghanistan. And although our current administration was wrong in dragging out the details to his friendly-fire death, I don't fault them for invading the country. The controlling political party was responsible for the WTC disaster.

Doc Spender said...

I was watching ESPN last night and between celebrity interviews with Emmitt Smith and Hank Williams, Jr. there was some type of sporting event going on.
Seriously, ESPN is destroying Monday Night Football with the freak show they're putting on.
Kornheiser beat us down with the "devil references" which were mildly amusing in the pregame chat but a complete asswhip by halftime.
The producers and directors felt that watching the Dallas sideline was more important than the game itself... which makes sense only if they were putting up pictures of the things that Tirico and Theismann would NOT STOP TALKING ABOUT.
Honestly? I watch my prime time football on Sunday nights. Madden gets on my nerves... MNF on ESPN causes me to tune out.

jen said...

I feel bad for Drew, but I could care less who starts at QB for the Cowgirls. Maybe Drew will come to Cleveland...he'd start for sure since Charlie Frye is going to get his bell rung one time too many here in the near future.

I hate being a Browns fan...I just had to get that off my chest.

God Bless the Scarlet and Gray. At least one day of my weekend consists of victorious football.

jen said...

Let me ask you guys out there....

Do you enjoy the chicks that do the sidelines interviews? We know that's why they are there...as eye candy, but do they annoy you guys with their questions and interruptions in the game?

As a female, and one that would think that interviewing football coaches/players would be the coolest job, I get so annoyed by these ladies. They ask the DUMBEST questions that no one really cares about the answer to, or that are SO rhetorical and don't even NEED to be answered. I know it's probably the list of five questions that she is told to ask, but they are dumb, time-wasting and annoying.

Ok, someone must have taken a wizz in my Cheerios today!

Todd Ching said...

No, the sideline reporter "eye candy" is really lame and annoying for me at least.

Then again, that could just be because most of the women aren't really that attractive (always above average but never knockout status). If they were knockout status, perhaps I'd feel differently.

Sad to say, that's my opinion on the matter.

Sean (Pittsburgh) said...

chrth - Can you really not see the disconnect? Pat was very right leaning in his views. The assumption can be made the Kevin was as well and that's why the joined the rangers together. His new view points are completely opposite. That's very obvious.

todd ching - Did you read any of the comments on the article? You said we should listen "anytime a former soldier and family of one speaks out". There are plenty of vets who were have fought and who have been involved that commented STRONGLY against Kevin's views. You need to listen to them just the same. Maybe you didn't because you said we should only listen to those speaking out "against the war". I think you should listen to BOTH SIDES.

Just my two cents...

ChrTh said...

chrth - Can you really not see the disconnect? Pat was very right leaning in his views. The assumption can be made the Kevin was as well and that's why the joined the rangers together. His new view points are completely opposite. That's very obvious.

I'm not challenging Kevin's disconnect, I'm challenging Dan's assertion that "unwavering supporters of this administration who double as the same football fans who respect Pat Tillman feel about the contradiction." My point is that there is no contradiction, that one can support Pat Tillman regardless of where they stand on the administration. And vice versa. Just because Kevin Tillman or Cindy Sheehan or whomever has a viewpoint does not immediately mean that his brother or her son is posthumously in opposition to the cause they died for.

On Sideline Reporters: Normally I hate them, but I must admit, some good questions were asked of Jerry Jones last night about the Bledsoe/Romo switch.

Sean (Pittsburgh) said...

You may have a point, honestly. I guess I find it a little hard to distinguish between the man and the foundation...but, of course, the foundation was created by his family and not by Pat himself.

Are you suggesting that is the case because his foundation does not appear to lean in favor of either viewpoint?

Richard said...

Jen,

Interesting point about the female sideline reporters. I have a different gripe about them.

Some of them belong in the booth upstairs.

Think about it. Wouldn't Suzy Kolber make a much better play-by-play announcer than Mike Trico or anyone working for NBC? I'd rather see Kolber and Collinsworth announce than Michaels and Madden.

If they are using the sideline reporters as eye candy, they should just mic one of the cheerleaders and have one of them interview the players going into the locker room.

Anonymous said...

I'm only making one point here:
if I don't trust Dan's football rankings, I'm sure not trusting his foreign policy views.

CorrND said...

Sure, Bledsoe can still sling it behind a good O-line, but Dallas doesn't have that! I liked the point that the MNF guys said about Romo's mobility freeing the TE to move out from blocking into the flat as a safety-valve receiver. With a little time, I think Romo could be decent.

And if nothing else, Romo is a hell of a lot more exciting to watch than Bledsoe.

ChrTh said...

@Sean (Pittsburgh):

The reason the foundation doesn't lean towards either viewpoint is because right now the foundation is trying to raise money to disburse. At this stage in the game, the intelligent decision is to take no public position that would alienate any contributors. Once it has a large enough endowment that it can start funding efforts, it may reveal a political face. But even that is tricky, because opinions shift rapidly. In 1994 Clinton looked like a sure goner in 1996 and he won. In early 1992 HW Bush looked like a sure victor so none of the 'first-tier' Dem candidates run (before Clinton-backers get on my case, the Clintons themselves have admitted that the initial reason for running in 1992 was to position themselves for 1996) but HW loses. Etc.

So to sum up: if the goal of a foundation is to be charitable (in any sense of the word), it maximizes its ability to help others by maintaining a neutral position on issues that are not directly tied into goals of the foundation.

Sean (Pittsburgh) said...

Since the foundation has no allegiance, I would think that supporters of it are more likely to be supporters of Pat...and his viewpoints. So, I guess I'm leaning back to understanding Dan's point more.

ChrTh said...


Since the foundation has no allegiance, I would think that supporters of it are more likely to be supporters of Pat...and his viewpoints. So, I guess I'm leaning back to understanding Dan's point more.


I would think supporters of Pat range across all political viewpoints. The man died doing something he thought was right. He had a life of luxury and he gave it up (some would say threw it away). He did something very few Americans would ever do, and for that he should be admired regardless of where you stand on the administration.

While I don't doubt his brother's sincerity, I fear he'll become another tool and end up hurting the Pat Tillman legacy.

EPorvaznik said...

>>solomonrex said...
I'm only making one point here:
if I don't trust Dan's football rankings, I'm sure not trusting his foreign policy views.>>

To invoke our man Dan: biggest chuckle ever (for now).