Greatest football myth laid to rest...

[Galian Beast]

Everyone knows how I love my stats, but my biggest pet peeve is people hating Tony Romo, actually my biggest pet peeve is people anointing Tom Brady as a great quarterback. He isn't...

Tom Brady isn't all that great, in fact I believe Romo as a player is MUCH better compared to Tom brady during the same time in his career (that might have a lot to do with T.O. though).

Tom Brady's december stats for 2001 and 2002.
QB Rating
2001 - 75.4 (January 62.1)
2002 - 67.5 (No Playoffs)

Tom Brady CERTAINLY wasn't Mr. December.

Tom brady didn't win another super bowl until the Patriots upgraded that offense, by making it multidimensional with Corey Dillon. Which was the first year tom brady had a qb rating above a 90.

It wasn't even until the patriots got Randy Moss did he become a 100+ quarterback. 2007 is so completely beyond anything he had ever done as a quarterback.

Tom Brady is a system quarterback, and that system got injected with Randy Moss, and he exploded to a 50 td season.

Romo has had the luxury of having T.O. his entire career so I don't want to praise him too much, but his production has certainly been better than Tom Brady's for an equivalent period of time.

Fact of the matter is the Patriots won their first championship based of a great defense, and an offense that was good or decent, and didn't turn the ball over often.

Romo hasn't had that defense to help him.

 

[jackrussell]

Have ratings for 03,04,05,06,07,08?

Or is this just a selective rant?

 

[Alexander]

Have ratings for 03,04,05,06,07,08?

Or is this just a selective rant?

I wouldn't even give it selective rant status.

It was complete nonsense.

 

[Galian Beast]

Well my point was selective.

People want to call this guy the golden child because he came in for Drew Bledsoe and won the super bowl... be he didn't win the super bowl. The Patriots defense did, in fact the won in spite of his poor performance.

Tony Romo in the same time playing had way better numbers, but our defense lets him down in december. Thats because our personnel in the secondary can't get it done, and also because we play vanilla all year, and people finally get after us at the end of the year.

My point wasn't that he has always had subpar december numbers. Just that he didn't start his career killing it at the end of the season.

Give Romo some time, and realize that there are a lot of factors in regards to whether or not we win or not.

How he plays is one thing, but how the offensive line plays, how the running game is going, how our defense plays, WHO we play... all factor in to whether or not we're succesful in december.

Just look at our schedule for december last year.

We went 1-3, playing 4 of the best defenses in the nfl. And we were 16 points (14 + 1 + 1) from being 3-1.

Romo pick lost us the game against pittsburgh, and I'll blame the offense in that game, but against baltimore... we should have had that game won.

 

[Galian Beast]

I wouldn't even give it selective rant status.

It was complete nonsense.

Things usually are nonsense if you don't know how to read... not my fault.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Good God I loathe QB ratings.

Brady succeeded his first couple of seasons in New England despite having no running game, not a single wide receiver anyone can name and playing in some ugly weather conditions.

He also has three rings.

Scoreboard.

 

[Galian Beast]

qb rating is an almost perfect description of a qb's personal production.

He didn't have great receivers, and his production reflects that, yet he is still considered a genius qb for that time. He succeeded without a running game? Not really. After their first super bowl, they didn't get back there until they got Corey Dillon. They won games... but look at the AFC East... it has not been a strong division this decade. Thats really a good 6 wins per year right of the tip. But I digress.

Deion branch was a wr drafted in the 2nd round.

wish we had a wr from the 2nd round right now...

Brady never put up huge numbers until Randy Moss. His numbers got better when he got a running game as well. But they were damn near pedestrian when he had his little fleet of receivers.

 

[zrinkill]

Tom Brady has the rings.

Until Romo gets some ...... he is not in Brady's league.

It may not be fair ...... but that is the way it is.

 

[Alexander]

Things usually are nonsense if you don't know how to read... not my fault.

I read it. It still was complete nonsense. I can explain why if you like.

Everyone knows how I love my stats

Mistake number one.

but my biggest pet peeve is people hating Tony Romo, actually my biggest pet peeve is people anointing Tom Brady as a great quarterback. He isn't...

This is where basically you have zero credibility. You hate people hating Romo, but your real motive is discredit Tom Brady. That's a brilliant basis for making a comparison. Very analytical, impartial and convincing.

You could have stopped here and saved everyone the time.

Tom Brady isn't all that great, in fact I believe Romo as a player is MUCH better compared to Tom brady during the same time in his career (that might have a lot to do with T.O. though).

So your contention right now is that Brady isn't a great QB because of what? His "inferior" play in 2001 and 2002?

Tom Brady's december stats for 2001 and 2002.
QB Rating
2001 - 75.4 (January 62.1)
2002 - 67.5 (No Playoffs)

Okay. So QB rating distinguishes what makes a QB "great"? Got you. Utter nonsense but I can see where you are going. Winning the game doesn't matter. But that QB rating, that's key. BTW, where is your hard-hitting Romo numbers during his first two Decembers and Januarys? I don't see them. And here's something to really blow your mind. Are you ready? What QB set the single-game record for highest single quarterback rating of 148.3 on October 21, 2001? That not so good Tom Brady.

Tom Brady CERTAINLY wasn't Mr. December.

Is that why everyone thinks he's good? Interesting. I thought it was the three rings he has.

Tom brady didn't win another super bowl until the Patriots upgraded that offense, by making it multidimensional with Corey Dillon.

So wouldn't that first Super Bowl be even more impressive since he was shackled by an offense that wasn't "multi-dimensional" and featured Antowain Smith?

Which was the first year tom brady had a qb rating above a 90.

Oh, there's that all important QB rating again. Nice to know, but irrelevant.

It wasn't even until the patriots got Randy Moss did he become a 100+ quarterback. 2007 is so completely beyond anything he had ever done as a quarterback.

It is called progression and growth. That tends to happen as QBs mature and get better. And yes, I would hope adding an All World WR makes someone better. That 50 TD season was an NFL record, but that darn Brady just isn't all that great. All-Time Records just happen to be broken by players like that.

Tom Brady is a system quarterback, and that system got injected with Randy Moss, and he exploded to a 50 td season.

And coincidentally, he didn't win a Super Bowl with that injection of talent. Hmmm.

Romo has had the luxury of having T.O. his entire career so I don't want to praise him too much, but his production has certainly been better than Tom Brady's for an equivalent period of time.

Give Romo the WR talent that Brady had in his first few seasons. I'd love to see how he does. The way things are looking this year, we might get to find out how he operates without upper echelon WRs.

Fact of the matter is the Patriots won their first championship based of a great defense, and an offense that was good or decent, and didn't turn the ball over often.

Since you love statistics so much, I hope you do realize the 2001 Patriots defense was so great it ranked 24th out of 32 teams overall (19th against the run, 24th against the pass). I am guessing you don't.

And as for that decent offense that didn't turn the ball over, who do you think contributed to that? Couldn't it be that Brady avoids turning the ball over? He's never had a season with more than 14 interceptions. Romo in his three seasons has notched 14 in 13 games (last year), 19 in 16 games and 13 in nine starts. I'll leave out the eleven fumbles over three seasons just to keep it simple for you (terrible Brady has 17 in 7 seasons).

Did you intentionally not use any logic whatsoever in your post?

Or is your point that we should appreciate gaudy stats over things that matter, like Super Bowl rings? If that's the case, you probably hated Aikman and would have thought Staubach was terrible as neither were TD throwing machines.

One day, Romo might get all the praise you apparently crave when he starts winning more. But he has a long ways to go until he's considered great or compares favorably to Tom Brady, unless you simply scan QB ratings after their first couple of seasons which apparently is your thing.

 

[DaBoys4Life]

 

[SultanOfSix]

I agree. Tom Brady had the advantage of being able to cheat for several years.

 

[Hoofbite]

QB rating means nothing when your have a guy who wins.

Seems like the OP is just looking for anything he can find to try and discredit Brady.

 

[NextGenBoys]

I read it. It still was complete nonsense. I can explain why if you like.



Mistake number one.


This is where basically you have zero credibility. You hate people hating Romo, but your real motive is discredit Tom Brady. That's a brilliant basis for making a comparison. Very analytical, impartial and convincing.

You could have stopped here and saved everyone the time.



So your contention right now is that Brady isn't a great QB because of what? His "inferior" play in 2001 and 2002?



Okay. So QB rating distinguishes what makes a QB "great"? Got you. Utter nonsense but I can see where you are going. Winning the game doesn't matter. But that QB rating, that's key. BTW, where is your hard-hitting Romo numbers during his first two Decembers and Januarys? I don't see them. And here's something to really blow your mind. Are you ready? What QB set the single-game record for highest single quarterback rating of 148.3 on October 21, 2001? That not so good Tom Brady.



Is that why everyone thinks he's good? Interesting. I thought it was the three rings he has.


So wouldn't that first Super Bowl be even more impressive since he was shackled by an offense that wasn't "multi-dimensional" and featured Antowain Smith?



Oh, there's that all important QB rating again. Nice to know, but irrelevant.



It is called progression and growth. That tends to happen as QBs mature and get better. And yes, I would hope adding an All World WR makes someone better. That 50 TD season was an NFL record, but that darn Brady just isn't all that great. All-Time Records just happen to be broken by players like that.



And coincidentally, he didn't win a Super Bowl with that injection of talent. Hmmm.



Give Romo the WR talent that Brady had in his first few seasons. I'd love to see how he does. The way things are looking this year, we might get to find out how he operates without upper echelon WRs.



Since you love statistics so much, I hope you do realize the 2001 Patriots defense was so great it ranked 24th out of 32 teams overall (19th against the run, 24th against the pass). I am guessing you don't.

And as for that decent offense that didn't turn the ball over, who do you think contributed to that? Couldn't it be that Brady avoids turning the ball over? He's never had a season with more than 14 interceptions. Romo in his three seasons has notched 14 in 13 games (last year), 19 in 16 games and 13 in nine starts. I'll leave out the eleven fumbles over three seasons just to keep it simple for you (terrible Brady has 17 in 7 seasons).

Did you intentionally not use any logic whatsoever in your post?

Or is your point that we should appreciate gaudy stats over things that matter, like Super Bowl rings? If that's the case, you probably hated Aikman and would have thought Staubach was terrible as neither were TD throwing machines.

One day, Romo might get all the praise you apparently crave when he starts winning more. But he has a long ways to go until he's considered great or compares favorably to Tom Brady, unless you simply scan QB ratings after their first couple of seasons which apparently is your thing.

Good God thats some ownage.

Nice try though Gallian, I hate when people hate on Romo as well. But come on, Brady is an all-timer, and I despise the punk

 

[superpunk]

http://touchdown.org/pats-camera.jpg

 

[Seven]

Damn. I was thinking Franco Harris finally fessed up to the ball hitting the ground..............

 

[The Quest for Six]

Have ratings for 03,04,05,06,07,08?

Or is this just a selective rant?

more like selective nonsense

Brady- 3 championships with far less talent to work with...

Romo can't even win a playoff gamee yet with a ready made team.

Comparing Brady and Romo is like comparing apples and oranges

 

[NextGenBoys]

Damn. I was thinking Franco Harris finally fessed up to the ball hitting the ground..............

Or that Montana was really throwing the ball away.

 

[theogt]

Good God I loathe QB ratings.

It's the single most predictive stat of any official stat. Other than actual wins and losses, it has the most "meaning" of any stat.

So, I'm sure you must hate all stats and not just QB ratings in particular.

 

[DFWJC]

I wouldn't even give it selective rant status.

It was complete nonsense.

Thank You

 

[SultanOfSix]

more like selective nonsense

Brady- 3 championships with far less talent to work with...

Romo can't even win a playoff gamee yet with a ready made team.

Comparing Brady and Romo is like comparing apples and oranges

Exactly. One's had the advantage of being able to cheat while the other hasn't.