Tony Romo Is Still Overrated

Bleacher ReportSenior Writer IOctober 2, 2008

I hesitate to respond to James Williamson's open challenge to Dallas Cowboy haters. I do so because it is obviously a transparent attempt to get closer to his stated goal of becoming an NFL analyst by striking an antagonistic pose. He hopes this will generate comments and reads to get into the popular or most read column.

Young James is obviously NOT interested in a reasoned, mature, and objective debate. I made just such an argument in support of a position he didn't like (Romo's overrated), and he responded by implying I had no brain, calling me a "dumbbut" I believe was his unique phrasing.

Now he has responded with an obviously subjective challenge while trumpeting his reputation for objectivity.

The only interest I have in this website is catharsis, not an exhibitionist debate. Being a professional sports columnist would be great, but so would being an astronaut. I'm taking a more realistic approach to success and just sat for the California Bar, so I write for myself.

If people like it or not and are inspired to respond, that is awesome and I appreciate each response (except the ones questioning my intelligence and anatomical possessions).

However, I do enjoy a good challenge, and it will be simple to prove to a reasonable person that I am the objective analyst, and James is not. I might even prove to some people that Romo is the most overrated player in the NFL.

Here we go.

First, in his challenge, he says he has trashed talked and it makes him sick. As I pointed out, he was lobbing sophomoric insults at me in the last couple days. More hilariously, later in the very same article, he implies I am either jealous, ignorant, deceiving myself, etc.

Forgive me if his contrition seems a little insincere and self-serving. Not exactly the best way to start a supposedly objective discussion.

Second, his entire argument for Romo being one of the best QBs in the NFL is statistic-driven. I suggest this is the product of playing too much fantasy sports or just growing up under the fantasy curtain that has fallen.

Video Play Button
Videos you might like

Statistics are great, but they do not always indicate greatness since greatness is measured by championships (in basketball and football at least).

Ask Dan Marino or Joe Montana. Or just look at recent history. Until the last several years, the unquestioned statistical virtuoso at QB was Peyton Manning. However, equally unquestionable was that the best QB was Tom Brady. Both played behind good lines on good teams, but Brady always won (don't everyone freak out, I said this has changed).

And here's where my argument destroys his.

I say Romo is the most overrated QB in the NFL. This can be true even if there are only three QBs better than he (i.e. Brady, Manning, Brees as seems to be the consensus).

Since the position held by the media, etc. is that Romo is one of the best QBs, he is overrated if he is not one of the best. And since 'best' is a matter of skill and performance, not of ranking, the fact that Romo is fourth best does not prove he is one of the best.

Those three QBs (and others, I would argue) possess skills and resumes that prove they are better than Romo. So even if I were to concede the point that only those three are better (which I don't), I would still be objectively right since you simply cannot argue that Romo is on their level.

Or I can use simple logic.

The most overrated player in the NFL is a QB, there is simply no reasonable alternative. Every football observer will tell you that the QB gets too much credit for wins and too much blame for losses.

In his comment to my original column, James is guilty of just this. He overrates Romo by saying he won in GB and Buffalo, while simultaneously proving his lack of objectivity by saying the team lost the playoff game to NY.

So, if the most overrated player in the NFL is a QB, what QB is more overrated than Romo? Brady? Favre? Mannings? Brees? Who? Nobody. Romo is the most overrated QB, ergo he is the most overrated player in the NFL.

Need more proof I'm objective?

How about the fact that I openly admit I'm a 'Niner fan, hate the Cowboys, and that Dallas is one of the best teams in the NFL (if not the best). Furthermore, I have continually said Romo is good, maybe even very good. Just not the best.

Finally, the perception is not that he has the tools to become one of the best or will become one of the best. I wouldn't necessarily argue with either of these points. But the perception is that Romo is (as in, at this moment) one of the best. That just isn't true and earns him the title of most overrated.

Tony Romo stands behind the best offensive line in football and orchestrates its premiere offense. He does so very well, but he has not won the really important games, even when he was supposed to.

Tom Brady has. Peyton Manning has. Eli Manning has done them one better by winning TWO games he had no business winning (man, I dislike the Mannings). Romo cannot yet compete with that.

If he is not one of the best, he is the most overrated. And he is clearly not one of the best.

There it is. In all it's objective and rationale glory, James. Against this, you have offered an argument for Romo based on statistics and regular-season wins. To further hurt your claim to objectivity and sound analysis, you speak of Romo in the same breath as Favre, Aikman, and Staubach.

Those are three Hall-of-Famers. Tony Romo has yet to win a playoff game and is only in his third year.

Unfortunately, you have done this in print. And the public can now judge you for it.


The latest in the sports world, emailed daily.