Eli by far, biased but let me give my reasons regardless. Leadership: Eli > Romo....Romo says all the right things but he gets flustered way too easy. Superbowls 1-0 Eli (over the last 3 seasons) Romo has 69 TD's and 38 INT in 38 games Eli has 61 TD's and 44 INT's in 41 games Romo obviously wins, but his durability can be questioned as well as his toughness, Eli played through a separated shoulder, Romo couldn't play through a pinky injury. Eli can lead a team and comeback, I'm not sure Romo can. Proof was games like The NFC divisional or even the Redskins game this year. Eli is clutch, Romo is not. I like how immersed Eli is into the game of football, my perception of Romo may be biased but it seems like he enjoys being in the media. The only thing you can truly worry about Eli is that he always has atleast 1-2 games a season where he implodes, some see that as a regression. I see at as Eli forcing things. Lets not pretend like Romo doesn't throw picks either, both of them need to reduce that, but Romo threw 5 this season on 3 less games than Eli's 6. I see Eli playing smarter and Romo continuing to gun sling.
After thinking about it more, I think I would take either QB to build a team around, no questions asked. If I had to chose..I hate Eli more than I hate Romo...so give me Romo. Brian, this thread is used. Make a new one.
In regards to Romo not playing through injury...it's really difficult to play with a broken pinkie on your throwing hand. That pinkie helps grip the ball A LOT, and without it, you lose a lot of velocity and a lot of accuracy on your passes.
Time to debunk some myths. First, Romo's injured pinky. First, if he takes the wrong kind of hit to it, he'll need season ending surgery. Its non displaced as of now. A bad hit could displace the 5th metacarpal, which would require season ending surgery. Secondly, its not an issue of toughness. He said he could play through the pain. The problem is, he needed that splint for awhile... and when he tried to practice with it, it took 2 or 3 seconds for him to adjust the ball in his hand with the splint in order to throw the ball after taking the snap. That is why he didn't play and had to sit out. Secondly... this Romo choking crap is garbage. He botched a snap in Seattle. That has nothing to do with his QB skills. Secondly, the Giants playoff game.... Fasano dropped a TD pass and we had to settle for a field goal. On another play, Crayton hesitated on his route on 3rd down at the end of the game... had he kept running, he could have likely scored (assuming he caught the ball). And on a key 3rd down play, Crayton was wide open with plenty of green in front of him. And. He. Dropped. The. Ball. Now... the game would have played out differently had those plays been converted, sure. Not arguing that. But had those plays been converted by Fasano and Crayton, Romo would have been praised for having a great game. The sad part is... none of those plays... really had anything to do with Romo. Romo did what he needed to do, but the receivers failed him. Thus, people think he failed. He was so close to having a 3 TD, possibly 4 TD and 0 INT game against the Giants.... but receivers dropped some balls, and he ended up with 1 TD and 1 INT IIRC. The difference between being "great" and "choking" apparently doesn't rest in the hands of Romo. He apparently needs to make catches, too.
Actually there was a segment on ESPN that stated the pinky is not that important and that he could play through it, if he wanted to.
Segment by whom? He was still wearing that splint. He could have played with the splint.... but as Romo said after he tried warming up... it took him 2-3 seconds to adjust the ball in his hand from the splint until he was able to throw it. He felt it would have hurt the team. And I agree. Secondly, he could have gone out there and tried playing without the splint. All it would have taken is a hit in the wrong area, displaced the 5th metacarpal, and required season ending surgery. Losing Romo for 3 weeks sucked. But it would have been worse to lose him for the season. The reality of it is, we were 4-2. Had St Louis, Tampa, and NY coming up.... then the bye. St Louis and Tampa were winnable games without Romo, even if the St Louis game didn't turn out that way. It would have been beyond stupid to risk losing Romo for an entire season just for those games. He said if it was the playoffs, he'd have played. And I agree. You risk that in the playoffs. Or perhaps even down the stretch of the season to get into the playoffs. You don't risk it in the middle of the season. The team needed to weather the loss some. It didn't. Doesn't mean the decision was wrong. We could have gone 0-3 during that stint and it still would have been the right decision.
^ sorry to get slightly off topic, but for the Cowboys to spend all that money this year an still think Brad Johnson was a feasible option in camp, well its quite an error. Especially with so many QB's in the market.... Ok, so Romo could have endangered that pinky even more, but you are telling me that he couldn't be back for the Giants game after 2 weeks of resting a broken pinky. Eh, all I know is that there are tougher QB's in the league that would have done it...and I would have respected Romo a bit more if he gave it even a 1 series shot.
I saw no point in risking it. If he's saying it's not health enough to play, than that's his call. I didn't want him to play if it was going to risk him getting a season ending injury. That's not worth it, not a chance.
I actually have Romo and Eli as well. I am going to bench Romo this week until I see how he plays today. If he puts up the numbers I am going to go with Romo into the stretch. Quick Note: I started Romo every week until his injury.
I have Romo and Warner and started Kurt this week because I just don't know how Romo's pinky would act. If he shows me something I might have to use him down the stretch since he can be just as explosive.
