Tony Romo’s announced retirement has people talking about the Hall of Fame and quarterbacks. Is he good enough? What is the criteria? What will the Hall of Fame committee do? Since I’ve put so much work into my quarterback research, I thought I’d take a shot at answering the question. The simple answer? No. Romo … Continue reading "Hall of Fame Quarterbacks" (http://www.solecismic.com/frontierblog/uncategorized/hall-of-fame-quarterbacks/)

More... (http://www.solecismic.com/frontierblog/uncategorized/hall-of-fame-quarterbacks/)

Without reading your write-up yet, I agree.
Simple really for Romo...NO. Not a chance in hell.

I'm as big of a Romo fanboy as any, but he's merely in my Hall of Very Good.

If Tony Romo is a HOF QB, than I'm a HOF lover.

Tomy Romo is Boomer Esiason. Boomer not in hall, Romo won't be in hall.

I like Tony.
Im a Cowboys fan.
Tony isnt a HOF QB.

Now if he had 1 ring and his stats, I'd say yes.

I don't know which way I'd lean on this without digging more, but I do know that Superbowl rings will have zero influence on my opinion.

How many playoff games did he win?

I like him. He was a good QB. But he shouldn't be considered for the HOF.

A good QB that I would have been happy to have on my team but absolutely NOT Hall-of Fame.

There's no way he's getting in. His legacy will be one of excitement, injuries and never winning the most important games.

Tomy Romo is Boomer Esiason. Boomer not in hall, Romo won't be in hall.

Good comparison

How many playoff games did he win?

I like him. He was a good QB. But he shouldn't be considered for the HOF.

Thought I heard he was 2-4 in the playoffs (officially). Though there were three straight years were they lost a week 17 game that was a winner gets in playoff game, so 2-7 in playoff type games.

Tomy Romo is Boomer Esiason. Boomer not in hall, Romo won't be in hall.

57%, 37920 yd, 7.3 y/a, 247 TD, 184 INT
Playoffs - 51.5%, 600 yd, 6.1 y/a, 4 TD, 3 INT

65.3%, 34183 yd, 7.9 y/a, 248 TD, 117 INT
Playoffs - 61.6%, 1316 yd, 7.1 y/a, 8 TD, 2 INT

I'm a Redskins fan, and don't think he's a HOF QB, but Romo is significantly better than Esiason. The 88 Bengals made the SB with Boomer throwing 1 TD and 3 INTs in 3 playoff games.

I'll forever remember Romo as that QB with a kick holder rating of 0

Romo was never anywhere near the best in the league for any extended period of time, and that's what seems to get guys in more than most things. Rings seem to matter too. I'd say there's absolutely no chance. He's always been about 5th or 6th best in the league in his prime.

I wonder if Romo played for the Chiefs or Titans if this would even be a discussion.

I wonder if Romo played for the Chiefs or Titans if this would even be a discussion.

I wonder if Romo played for the Chiefs or Titans if this would even be a discussion.

IMetTonyRomo

I wonder if Romo played for the Chiefs or Titans if this would even be a discussion.

IMetTonyRomo

Yay database errors!

(damned Russians)

Romo was never anywhere near the best in the league for any extended period of time, and that's what seems to get guys in more than most things. Rings seem to matter too. I'd say there's absolutely no chance. He's always been about 5th or 6th best in the league in his prime.

Plus, there are a lot of contemporaries who i think have strong HOF contenders - Ben Roethe, P manning, D Brees, T Brady, and Aaron Rodgers are all, I suspect in, the HOF, right? I mean, they have MVPs, multiple Bowls, great records, and such. And Tony Romo was never that. He would need to head to another team post-Cowboys and lit it up late in his career a la Rich Gannon, in order to be a serious contender for the HOF to my mind.

And frankly, the fact we;re having this conversation strikes me due to the team he played for (Cowboys) and their presence in the league more than to his numbers and field presence.


EDIT - I haven;t looked at stats, but I'd put Romo on the next level about even with, say, Rivers over in San Diego, than anybody in that elite 5 I mentioned above, or like the ability of, say, a Mark Brunell at his height if the Jags late 90s dynasty had that continued without selling out the cap for a (failed) push for the Ring. EDIT2 - Actually, I just checked out the stats and Rivers has been a lot better. NM, bad comparison. Move along! :)

56 127 2,829 4,335 65.3 34,183 7.9 85 248 117 97.1

It's hard to endorse a QB with just four Pro Bowls on his resume, considering just how many we give out each year.

So really, I;'m not sure I'd have Romo even at 5 or 6 statistically on any given year at the QB spot, but more like 9 or 10 it seems.

My first gut reaction to the proposition is "yeah, probably so"

And nothing else I come up with shoves me any closer to yes, while there's a number of things that shove me towards no.

My first gut reaction to the proposition is "yeah, probably so"

did you have an upset stomach at first?

I think that Rivers & Eli will make for an interesting comparison. First, they will be forever linked because of how Eli got to NY.

Second, Eli has multiple rings. And Rivers has not had much postseason success. But at any given point, I'd have rather had Rivers on my team than Eli. He just seems like the better QB based on the eye test.

It seems that Eli will get in easily (2 rings, NYC media, Manning name), but Rivers probably isn't that close barring a late career SB run.