Romo came in as the Dallas dynasty was fading. He was judged against the standards of what came before. Not the standards of the generic middle-of-the-pack NFL team.
The volume of fan interest, media hype, talking head airtime, etc., about any team or any player in any sport is not proportional to success or failure. It’s exponential.
For example: this year Minnesota came last in MLB. Finished the season 30 games back in the AL, the less lopsided of the two leagues. Cubs came first in the regular season, much as it pains me to write these words. And might take it all tonight, much *more *as it pains me to write these words. Go Cards! Go Fish!
The point is that the volume of stuff said about the Cubs (even only considering during the regular season) was vastly more than the was said about the Twins. 10x, 15x more.
What can fans, commentators, etc., say about the number 2 team? Lots and lots, almost all of it praise, all the way during the climb up to the end of the season. Then they lose at the bitter end. What’s left to say about them now? “Better luck next time?” People still want to talk about “their” team. But all they can think to say is “they lost; here’s why …”
Forecast tomorrow’s commentary about the Cubs compared to the commentary about the Indians for the two different possible outcomes. Somebody will be a hero. Somebody else will be a goat. Whoever that goat is, the fans and pundits were singing his praises to the sky 10 days ago when he/they won their LCS. Not so tomorrow.
That’s not what’s said about Romo though. Many if not most people talk about him like he’s a hack. Many people regard Malone as the best power forward of all time. I really can’t see how those are in any way comparable.
Many people regard Tony Romo as a great quarterback (for instance, you). Many people regard Karl Malone as a great power forward (again, you).
Many other people regard Tony Romo as a hack (as you note). Many other people regard Karl Malone as a failure (as I assert - primarily because he never won a title).
They have both failed to win ‘the big game’. They both played consistently well on very good teams that did not win a title. They both have numerous playoff opportunities on their resume.
While Romo is a step below Malone in terms of greatness, they are very comparable.
Romo is not a bad QB, but has never even been to ‘the big game’. In the modern NFL, you must win your games in January before you can be considered great.
I think there is actually a sour-spot* for excellent athletes in terms of reputation and criticism. Tony Romo spent almost a decade as roughly the 6th best Quarterback in the world; he’s a great player – just great enough, in fact, to be compared to the 5 guys who are better than him instead of the 26 who are worse. “Romo? Pfft, please, Drew Brees is way better.” And he is better, but that’s because Drew Brees is better than almost everyone.
You see the same thing is other sports. Carmelo Anthony and Dwight Howard have been great basketball players with amazing careers, but they get more criticism than praise because they’re not Kevin Durant or LeBron James.
=> Get it? Opposite of “sweet spot” – I just thought of that!
Romo gets bagged on because he’s Jerruh’s boy, and Jerruh never found a comment too stupid to make in front of a camera. The truth is that Dak should stay under center, he has earned it with his performance, but along comes Jerruh to tell everybody that Romo’s the starter when he’s healthy.
Romo has had to carry the weight of his team and his owner since he first won the job. That’s why it’s fun to make fun of him. Now, is he a Hall of Famer? Probably not. But he has nothing to be ashamed of. And I, as an avowed Cownoys hater, will still make fun of him because that’s what I do. There’s no justice in that, I admit, but so what? It’s just sports, rivalries, and tribalism.
Yes, but Romo has won two playoff games whereas no other Cowboys quarterback since 1996 has won even one. And yet for some reason Dallas fans criticize Romo more harshly than those quarterbacks. So the standard does not make sense.
Again, this thread isn’t about Romo specifically, even though the name is in the title. It’s akin to a teacher criticizing a good student for getting a B+ but giving a bad student a pass for getting a C-.
Andy Dalton has led the Bengals to the playoffs every year he has played (including his rookie year!) and every year loses that game. Going back to the 2011 season. The only exception is last season, and only because he broke his thumb and couldn’t play in that playoff game (which as always the Bengals lost).
He doesn’t get Romo levels of hate, but he is basically ignored by the media despite having a relatively solid body of work (including going to the Pro Bowl twice, once in his rookie year). He’s practically invisible.
I’m not complaining about it (I couldn’t care less, I’m a lifelong Seahawks fan) but I think it’s another example of how making it to the postseason year after year just to fall flat can color how people feel about your ability as an athlete, even though it takes an entire team to lose a game (unless you’re the Vikings and then it really is your kicker’s fault).
