One thing that I talked about in my Weekly Report that I wanted to expand on is the hype surrounding Tony Romo in Dallas.  In case you have been out of the football loop the last couple days, Tony Romo threw 5 interceptions in the game against Buffalo, but still managed to help his team win the game 25-24, thanks to some last second heroics, an onside kick, and a 53 yard field goal that was kicked successfully twice.
 
In today's fast food paced culture, experts and fans alike are very eager to evaluate on a "what have you done for me in the last 30 seconds" basis.  It reminds me of the Investment Company that has a commercial with a gentleman bidding at an auction.  He buys a piece of artwork, and then tells the auctioneer that he would like to sell it seconds after buying it.  While it can be tempting, just as it doesn't make sense to evaluate stocks or art purchases a day after they are bought; it doesn't pay to evaluate QBs in a similar fashion.  Yet while we laugh at the idiot in the commercial, we are guilty as sports fans of doing this everyday. 
 
In my opinion, we do two things wrong when we evaluate a QB.  1) We do not allow a QB to play enough games before we evaluate him; 2) We remember only the very good and very bad in evaluating a quarterback.   

Take a look at Joe Montana.  In his 4 Super Bowls, he threw 11 touchdowns and 0 interceptions.  When we think of Joe Montana, we think of the most clutch quarterback in the most difficult of circumstances.  We think of the guy who was 92 yards from the endzone in the Super Bowl and not only spotted John Candy in the endzone, but actually pointed him out in the huddle to his teammates.  He then proceeded to march the length of the field for the game-winning touchdown. 

Few people remember that Joe Montana played the New York Giants in the 1985 and 1986 playoffs.  Few people remember that Joe Montana went 0-2 in the first round of the playoffs those years.  He was 26 for 47 for 296 yards with 0 touchdowns and 1 pick in a 17-3 loss to the Giants in 1985.   Few people talk about the 1986 playoff game where the Giants beat the 49ers by a score of 49-3.  Montana was 8 for 15 for 98 yards and 2 interceptions in that game before Jeff Kemp came into the game.  

We remember what sticks out in our minds the most and we forget that which we feel is irrelevant.   I'm not saying that Joe Montana was a poor postseason quarterback.  What I am saying that he wasn't 22 for 29 for 297yards with 5 touchdowns and 0 picks every time he took the field, as he was in the 55-10 demolition of the Broncos in Super Bowl XXIV. 
 
A perfect example of this is my favorite QB Brett Favre.  The perception of him by people that have not followed his career closely is that while he is great at throwing touchdown passes, he is too reckless with the ball.  Everyone remembers the St Louis playoff game, where he threw 6 picks.  Another popular choice is the Viking playoff game where he threw 4 interceptions.  The perception is that while he gives you a great chance to throw 4 touchdown passes; he also gives you a great chance to throw 4 picks. 
 
The problem is that isn't reality.  Most people consider a 1 or 0 pick game to be exceptional.  2 or 3 picks isn't desirable, but will happen from time to time.  Four or more picks and you are a complete failure.  The worst of the worst.  Rex Grossman bad.  So what would you say if I told you that in the 246 games in which Brett Favre has played, he has only had a four-interception game six times, or 2.5% of his career games?  What if I also told you the only season he did it twice in that season was 2005?  Furthermore what if I told you that Brett Favre has played in 169 games where he has either 0 or 1 pick? 
 
In other words, if you attended a Brett Favre game between 1991 and 2007, you would have a 68.7% chance of seeing one pick or fewer, as opposed to a 2.5% chance of seeing him throw a four-interception game or worse.  Yet the perception that critics have of him is that he is far too reckless to be considered the best QB of all time, simply because he had two four pick games in 20 playoff starts, as opposed to 13 playoff games where he threw 1 pick or fewer, including both Super Bowls.     
 
Tom Brady and Peyton Manning on the other hand are not only thought of as great QBs, but smart QBs.  Some are talking about these two perhaps being the best QBs of all time.  Manning actually has been phenomenal at taking care of the ball, having only one 4-pick game in his regular season career.  Brady actually has five regular season games since 2001 where he has thrown 4 interceptions or more in a single game.  What is funny is that many people consider Tom Brady as the quarterback that is more careful with the ball, mainly because he didn't have a 4 pick game in the playoffs, like Manning did against New England in 2003.  It gets back to remembering the good and forgetting the bad. 
 
The problem with the NFL is that due to no fault of its own, we can't watch every game.  We get to watch our home team, and 3 nationally televised games per week.  That means that we are left to judge QBs that do not play in our market by the small body of work we see them or what we read about them in the media.  Because Favre threw 6 interceptions in a nationally televised playoff game, the perception across the country is that he is a gun slinging reckless QB, when in fact; Brady actually has more 4-interception games since 2001, playing on teams that have been far superior. 
 
This gets me back to Tony Romo.  Because of the untimely game he had on Monday night, I'm starting to hear the Good Tony v. Bad Tony analysis.  It is very similar to the Good Rex v. Bad Rex debate that happened before he became Benched Rex.  In 15 career starts, Romo has had more than 4 picks once, which was on Monday night.  He has had 1 pick or less in 11 of his 15 starts.  He has 2 or more touchdowns in 10 of his 15 starts.  I would say there has been a lot of Good Tony Romo and not much bad. 
 
But, just as he was anointed as the "Chosen One" for his 5 touchdown pass performance on Turkey Day, he is know being anointed as Rex Grossman's evil twin, because he threw 5 picks on a Monday Night game.
 
Rex Grossman, the man that people are starting to compare Romo to had 7 touchdowns and 15 interceptions in his last 10 ball games before getting benched, including four games where he had three picks.  That is why he lost his job.  Romo and Grossman aren't even in the same realm of discussion.  Yet Cowboy fans will point to the Thanksgiving game to build Romo up, while Cowboy haters will point to the Monday night game to tear him down.  

I don't know how good Tony Romo will be.  It isn't because he had 5 picks against Buffalo or because he had 5 touchdowns against Tampa Bay and that my head is spinning so fast that I don't know what to do.  It's because he has had 15 career starts.  I truly don't believe you can measure a QBs effectiveness until he has been on the job for three full seasons.  You need a body of work to look at.  You need to see how defenses adjust to tendencies.  You need to see how he handles success and failure. So far I like what I see.  But that doesn't mean he is destined to greatness or a one hit wonder.  
 
I think that we as fans need to keep something in mind.  STOP treating every game as if it defines someone's career.  The fun thing about watching Brett Favre was watching him evolve from a 252 pound out of shape, party too hard youngster to one of the all time greats.   The fun thing about watching Peyton Manning evolve was seeing the day when he stopped being Archie's kid.  The fun thing about watching Tom Brady evolve was watching a 6th round pick that was a backup in college become the leader of a modern day dynasty.  Can you imagine how much fun we would have missed as sports fans if we started arguing about their place in history after their first season?

Let Romo do the same.  Whether Romo becomes a first ballot Hall of Famer or one of the most over hyped players in the history of sport, it would be a shame to be so busy wondering what Romo will become, that you miss the journey he is going to take to get wherever he is going.