The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

There is a lot of talk around the league on QB's like Tony Romo, Mark Sanchez, Matt Cassell and even Sam Bradford on their level of play versus expectations. Sanchez was a high 1st round pick. Ditto for Sam. Romo was an UFA.

When do you give up and admit to yourself as a HC or GM that "it ain't working?" Dallas and N.Y. have been pretty darn patient if you ask me. Is there a time limit or do you give up when it is obvious the guy is not getting better?

IMO, you know after 2, maybe 3 years if he continues to improve. Sanchez and Romo are as good as they are gonna get. What do you think and what other QB's around the league should be replaced?

Yeah, but Romo is not the problem in Dallas.  The problem in Dallas is Jerry Jones.  Nothing will change there as long as he's the GM.

If the 49ers "gave up" on Alex Smith, where would they be today?  He's the classic story of when NOT to give up.

I can buy your theory. Is it just me, or has Dallas gotten worse since Ireland left? Must be a coincidence. lol

Exactly where they are right now?

If Jim Harbaugh can make Alex Smith look competent, who's to say that he couldn't do the same for Troy Smith or Shaun Hill or Colin Kaepernick?

I don't know the entire story, but I am sure someone on this forum can add the details, but I remember reading that Alex had multiple coaches and schemes in just a few years. In other words, no stability.

Smith is a perfect example of why you just can't go around firing a coach everytime you lose a game.


Romo and Sanchez however, are a different story. I like Tony, I really do, but I think his 15 minutes ARE UP. As for Sanchez, his 15 minutes were up yrs. ago.   

Ask any knowledgeable Cowboy fan (I know they can be hard to find), and they'll be the first to tell you:  Jerry the owner needs to fire Jerry the GM.

When you have a back up QB that is better than the starting QB or an oppertunity to get one thru the draft or trade.

two or three years.

That's what I was thinking.  You always need to be looking to improve EVERY position.  Look at Indy, they finally gave up on Manning, tired of not winning SB's with him, kept losing to the Patsies.  ;D

I assure you that Indy "giving up" on Manning had everything to do with:

1) "lucking" into the best QB prospect of the last 20 years
2) Manning recovering from a recent injury that sidelined him for an entire season

They certainly didn't get "tired" of winning the division every year.

^^^ I thought that was obvious. :)

Spider, that is exactly mine and Masterfin's point. 

You try and improve every position, NOT just the QB position.  You give up on your current QB the same way you give up on your punter or middle linebacker.  When you have an oppertunity to get a better one. 

Bledsoe wasn't a horrible QB for the NEP, he just wasn't as good as Brady.  Peyton Manning was a bad QB for Indy, but they got lucky and had an oppertunity to improve their team for the long term.  Pennington wasn't the greatest QB to every play the game in 2008.  He was just the best option for Miami at the time. 

Alex Smith looked am awful lot like Alex Smith yesterday. I know it's only one game, but his entire year last year didn't convince me he was anything special. 3000 yards and 17 TDs are good numbers, but SF seemed to me like a team that didn't throw the ball very much at all- almost like they were trying to hide his weaknesses rather than showcase any strengths he had. They led the league in TO difference and didn't let anybody score on them. Even after Smith's "best" year, didn't they still pursue Manning? Going after another QB sounds like giving up on what you have. -EK

Depends on the situation. Depends on how much time you're willing to invest. Depends on the availability of other QB's. Depends on what the QB had to work with.