Where do you rank Tony Romo out of the 32 starting QBs in the league?

[DABOYZ]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

How are they better? Romo's numbers blow theirs out of the water. Like I said earlier they simply have and have had much more consistent and reliable supporting casts. Our Romo on the Giants or Steelers and he has two Super Bowls if not more than that.

So is Quincy Carter better than Romo becuase he took the talentless team he had to the playoffs?

C'mon man, the only thing you can stand on is stats. And unless you have a Magic Romo ball you can't sit here and expect anyone to take you seriously when you say "if Romo played for this team then he would have 2 SB..."

We all know Romo Stats are pretty good. The X factor is his inability to avoid mistakes when he needs too. Look no further than the players who play against him on a regular basis. They all say the same things, good QB but can easily be forced into making mistakes.

[Big Blue Joe]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

How are they better? Romo's numbers blow theirs out of the water. Like I said earlier they simply have and have had much more consistent and reliable supporting casts. Our Romo on the Giants or Steelers and he has two Super Bowls if not more than that.

What is that opinion based on? Both Eli and Big Ben have better career post season QBR's than Romo.

[anj113]

Also the way Eli is playing now has NOTHING to do with the succes of his defense.. Eli has become a much better QB... he is def ELITE and has become a star. He no longer has to rely on his D to save his ***.. Eli NOW can win games on his own.. he has earned the respect.. Again I hate to say it because I despise the Giants, but its silly now now not to accept.. Trust me I fought it for so long, but come on now..

[tyke1doe]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

That's your logic that Vick made it to the NFC Championship one time really?

And Romo has made it how many times?

What has he done since? Not a damn thing. He's only made the playoffs a few times since then. You said Flacco isn't better than Romo which is true even though he made it to a conference championship game. Then what exactly is your reasoning for using that same reasoning to you clearly didn't apply to Flacco to Vick? If you're gonna say Vick is better than Romo because he went to a conference championship game than how can you not do the same for Flacco was has actually made two conference championship games?

Uh, because Flacco benefits from the Ravens defense?

The Falcons defense wasn't as good as the Ravens defense, and yet Vick carried a Falcons team to the NFC Championship.

Yes, I do place a lot on quarterbacks who take their teams further than they should go.

Bottom line though is Mike Vick has had one good season in the NFL. That one season isn't really better or even close to as good as any of Romo's seasons he's played. You can take Romo's worst season as a pro which is probably 2008 compare it to Vick's and who wins? Romo by a long shot. In their respective careers Romo has 154 touchdown passes compared to Vick's 117. Romo thrown two more picks. He has 80 while Vick has 78. Keep in mind though Tony has thrown the ball more so of course he's gonna have more picks. Tony on his career has 20 more pass attempts. Tony has a phenomenal completion percentage of about 65 while Vick has mediocre and that's being nice completion percentage of 56. Nearly a 10 point difference. Tony also has a QB rating of 96 while Vick only has a QB rating of 80. Tony blows Vick out of the water in every single category essentially.

Vick has only been back in the league three years. And he had to shake off rust. Romo has been in the league longer compared, of course, to when Vick reentered the league.

Besides, for the most part, Vick was a running quarterback for the first part of his career.

In short absolutely no argument can be made that Michael Vick is a better quarterback than Tony Romo. Better athlete? Of course. Better quarterback? Hells to the no.

You have your opinion. I have mine. It ain no biggy. I don't get all bent out of shape over opinions. When it's all said and done, they don't matter anyway.

[KB1122]

Originally Posted by TheCoolFan

Big Ben is definitely Top-5. If there's any debate then he's 5A and Eli is 5B or vice versa. The guy has a terrible OLine and he gets beat up just as much if not more than any other QB...it just doesn't look like it because he's a big guy and can absorb the hits

Big Ben has been over 100 on qbr twice in his career and is there through five games this year. He's very underestimated.

Phil Rivers has been over 100 3 times and been to a couple of AFC Championship games, but people here act like it's crazy to rate him ahead of Romo.

[JBond]

Originally Posted by MartinRamone

1- Brady
2- Rodgers
3- Brees
4- Peyton
5- Eli
6- Ben
7- Romo

Very fair. The top two may shuffle, but Romo is in my top seven.

[Tezz]

I put Romo in the 7-10, but didn't include the newer QBs because I wanted to give it sometime. I will say this though if the NFL held a draft for all the QBs in the league and the number one pick was Andrew Luck I wouldn't be outraged... Luck makes you competitive right now and the future for many seasons.

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Originally Posted by tyke1doe

And Romo has made it how many times?



Uh, because Flacco benefits from the Ravens defense?

The Falcons defense wasn't as good as the Ravens defense, and yet Vick carried a Falcons team to the NFC Championship.

Yes, I do place a lot on quarterbacks who take their teams further than they should go.



Vick has only been back in the league three years. And he had to shake off rust. Romo has been in the league longer compared, of course, to when Vick reentered the league.

Besides, for the most part, Vick was a running quarterback for the first part of his career.



[View Full Quote]You have your opinion. I have mine. It ain no biggy. I don't get all bent out of shape over opinions. When it's all said and done, they don't matter anyway.

It's not an opinion dude it's a fact. Tony Romo is a much better football player than Mike Vick. The stats that I provided clearly show that. You can use the whole Vick is better because he has Super Bowls like you do with Eli even though that is another ridiculous argument because Vick himself has never won anything. Vick made it to one conference championship game so what? You act like he had a horrible supporting cast when he didn't. Certainly not like Romo last season.

[DatWin]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

How are they better? Romo's numbers blow theirs out of the water. Like I said earlier they simply have and have had much more consistent and reliable supporting casts. Our Romo on the Giants or Steelers and he has two Super Bowls if not more than that.

First off, Romo is hovering around the 10-11 range as of right now. Second, I understand that Romo has put up some pretty stats, and he certainly has proven that he's a good QB and can make some plays. But the fact is, Ben and Eli play their best football when the stakes are the highest. If you want to make the case that "Romo is better because of his numbers" then fine, but putting up good numbers is nowhere near as valuable as playing your best football when it matters the most; something Tony has clearly shown he cannot do. Eli and Ben have made clutch play after clutch play and each has 2 Super Bowl rings to show for it.

Also, it's not like Romo hasn't had talent throughout his career. He's had a lot of good players to work with: T.O., Jason Witten, Miles Austin, Dez Bryant, Marion Barber, DeMarco Murray, Felix Jones, Martelleus Bennett (which as you can see, is playing better with a BETTER QB), Patrick Crayton, etc. The defense hasn't been full of slouches either.

You want to keep saying that Eli has had a far superior supporting cast, but in each of Eli's two Super Bowl winning seasons, his team has gone 10-6 and 9-7 respectively. The same Giants that won the Super Bowl last year, lost to the Redskins TWICE. In no way, shape, or form are the Giants vastly superior to Dallas EXCEPT when it comes to quarterback play. Eli Manning gets the job done when the most is at stake.

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Originally Posted by DatWin

First off, Romo is hovering around the 10-11 range as of right now. Second, I understand that Romo has put up some pretty stats, and he certainly has proven that he's a good QB and can make some plays. But the fact is, Ben and Eli play their best football when the stakes are the highest. If you want to make the case that "Romo is better because of his numbers" then fine, but putting up good numbers is nowhere near as valuable as playing your best football when it matters the most; something Tony has clearly shown he cannot do. Eli and Ben have made clutch play after clutch play and each has 2 Super Bowl rings to show for it.

[View Full Quote]Also, it's not like Romo hasn't had talent throughout his career. He's had a lot of good players to work with: T.O., Jason Witten, Miles Austin, Dez Bryant, Marion Barber, DeMarco Murray, Felix Jones, Martelleus Bennett (which as you can see, is playing better with a BETTER QB), Patrick Crayton, etc. The defense hasn't been full of slouches either.

You want to keep saying that Eli has had a far superior supporting cast, but in each of Eli's two Super Bowl winning seasons, his team has gone 10-6 and 9-7 respectively. The same Giants that won the Super Bowl last year, lost to the Redskins TWICE. In no way, shape, or form are the Giants vastly superior to Dallas EXCEPT when it comes to quarterback play. Eli Manning gets the job done when the most is at stake.

I'm sorry, but I cannot take your opinion seriously if you don't think Tony Romo is a top 10 quarterback. Your assertion that Romo isn't clutch is ridiculous. The man has had several fourth quarter comebacks in his career. Last year he gave the Cowboys a lead in the fourth quarter several times most notably against they Giants and the defense choked it away. Once again in the month of December Romo had 10 touchdown passes and just one interception.

Those are terrific numbers for a guy who supposedly isn't clutch. If your gonna deny Eli has had a superior supporting cast than there's no point in debating with you further since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The guy has had a solid not great, but solid and steady offensive line that can actually give him time to throw. Romo hasn't. His recievers while maybe not as talented as Romo's have clearly been more reliable and consistent than the Cowboys recievers.

The defense for the Giants has been terrific for years. They have had the best defensive line/pass rush in football for several years. Sure they may have not that great from a statistical stand point in the regular season, but they completely turned it around in the playoffs. They only allowed 20 points, 17 points, and 2 points respectively. The Cowboys defense was awful in the fourth quarter of games. Simply unreliable and inconsistent. Secondary was terrible and got not pressure on the opposing quarterbacks. They made scrubs like Rex Grossman look like an elite quarterback. This season the secondary is improved, but the defensive line is still mediocre at best. Still no one outside of DeMarcus Ware can apply pressure on a consistent basis.

Bottom line saying Tony is too blame for last year's ending is ridiculous.

[DatWin]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

I'm sorry, but I cannot take your opinion seriously if you don't think Tony Romo is a top 10 quarterback. Your assertion that Romo isn't clutch is ridiculous. The man has had several fourth quarter comebacks in his career. Last year he gave the Cowboys a lead in the fourth quarter several times most notably against they Giants and the defense choked it away. Once again in the month of December Romo had 10 touchdown passes and just one interception.

Those are terrific numbers for a guy who supposedly isn't clutch. If your gonna deny Eli has had a superior supporting cast than there's no point in debating with you further since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. The guy has had a solid not great, but solid and steady offensive line that can actually give him time to throw. Romo hasn't. His recievers while maybe not as talented as Romo's have clearly been more reliable and consistent than the Cowboys recievers.

[View Full Quote]The defense for the Giants has been terrific for years. They have had the best defensive line/pass rush in football for several years. Sure they may have not that great from a statistical stand point in the regular season, but they completely turned it around in the playoffs. They only allowed 20 points, 17 points, and 2 points respectively. The Cowboys defense was awful in the fourth quarter of games. Simply unreliable and inconsistent. Secondary was terrible and got not pressure on the opposing quarterbacks. They made scrubs like Rex Grossman look like an elite quarterback. This season the secondary is improved, but the defensive line is still mediocre at best. Still no one outside of DeMarcus Ware can apply pressure on a consistent basis.

Bottom line saying Tony is too blame for last year's ending is ridiculous.

Okay, first of all I said "AS OF RIGHT NOW". 5 touchdowns and 8 Interceptions is not a top 10 QB.

Second...Um...The Giants secondary are the ones who made Rex Grossman look like an elite QB, not ours. We beat Washington both times last year, the Giants did not. Clearly, I do not know what I'm talking about. Also, like I said...THE GIANTS WENT 9-7 LAST YEAR. How on earth does that translate into a far superior TEAM than Dallas? They won 1 (one) more game than we did and it just so happened to be the one that mattered the most. Playing your best football when the most is on the line matters to me; it might not matter to you and it might not be your measuring stick of what makes a good QB but to me, it matters. Troy Aikman NEVER put up big numbers, he only threw for 20 or more TDs in a season ONCE! Yes he had Emmitt to throw hand the ball off to, but he did not put up superstar numbers by any means. Troy, however, was lights out in the postseason. He won went it mattered the most and so does Eli.

[anj113]

Originally Posted by DatWin

Okay, first of all I said "AS OF RIGHT NOW". 5 touchdowns and 8 Interceptions is not a top 10 QB.

[View Full Quote]Second...Um...The Giants secondary are the ones who made Rex Grossman look like an elite QB, not ours. We beat Washington both times last year, the Giants did not. Clearly, I do not know what I'm talking about. Also, like I said...THE GIANTS WENT 9-7 LAST YEAR. How on earth does that translate into a far superior TEAM than Dallas? They won 1 (one) more game than we did and it just so happened to be the one that mattered the most. Playing your best football when the most is on the line matters to me; it might not matter to you and it might not be your measuring stick of what makes a good QB but to me, it matters. Troy Aikman NEVER put up big numbers, he only threw for 20 or more TDs in a season ONCE! Yes he had Emmitt to throw hand the ball off to, but he did not put up superstar numbers by any means. Troy, however, was lights out in the postseason. He won went it mattered the most and so does Eli.

yeah agree, its not like the Giants were the 85 Bears last year.. they ahd the same average record we did going down the stretch.. After they beat us the following week they lost to the Redskins... I do agree their D was light years better than us last year, but the Giants barely made the playoffs.. SO its impossible not to give Eli any credit.. SOme people will never face it and thats fine, but Eli is a tremedous QB.. he has grown and matured into a fantastic football player.

[Cowboys&LakersFan]

Originally Posted by anj113

yeah agree, its not like the Giants were the 85 Bears last year.. they ahd the same average record we did going down the stretch.. After they beat us the following week they lost to the Redskins... I do agree their D was light years better than us last year, but the Giants barely made the playoffs.. SO its impossible not to give Eli any credit.. SOme people will never face it and thats fine, but Eli is a tremedous QB.. he has grown and matured into a fantastic football player.

You people really need to get some damn glasses because I never once said Eli wasn't a great quarterback. He clearly is, but you can't deny he had alot of help along the way to his two Super Bowls. Tony's supporting cast has constantly let him down especially last season. I mean how the hell do you blow a 12 point lead in like what five minutes? Guarantee you'd never see that from New York.

[burmafrd]

only a moron would not have Romo in the top 10.

Sadly there are a few in this thread

[anj113]

Originally Posted by Cowboys&LakersFan

You people really need to get some damn glasses because I never once said Eli wasn't a great quarterback. He clearly is, but you can't deny he had alot of help along the way to his two Super Bowls. Tony's supporting cast has constantly let him down especially last season. I mean how the hell do you blow a 12 point lead in like what five minutes? Guarantee you'd never see that from New York.

Every team has help winning Super Bowls, everybody... YOu base your facts only on numbers.. Which is fine because I defend Romo in that sense.. Romo is very very good, but in my opinion I think Eli is better... WE can all agree to disagree... I think its unfair to say all these QB's arent better than Romo because they have better teams..