Only one QB in NFL history

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
This is kind of a meaningless stat IMO. TD:INT ratio is a very valid stat, but not in this format. Once Romo throws 3 more INTs, it'll no longer apply. Even Rogers (who has a ratio that wipes the floor with everyone else), will reach a point where this doesn't apply.
 

NJ22

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
894
This is kind of a meaningless stat IMO. TD:INT ratio is a very valid stat, but not in this format. Once Romo throws 3 more INTs, it'll no longer apply. Even Rogers (who has a ratio that wipes the floor with everyone else), will reach a point where this doesn't apply.

Well saying a guy has 200 or more TDs and under 100 ints, should kind of give you the >2-1 td ratio. Rodgers is on a different planet with his numbers.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,886
Reaction score
12,670
Well saying a guy has 200 or more TDs and under 100 ints, should kind of give you the >2-1 td ratio. Rodgers is on a different planet with his numbers.

Yeah, I get that. It's just not very relavent to say he is the only one with that stat when others I am sure had it at one point but they have played longer and their INTs eventually got over that point. Now, if he was the only one to have under 100 INTs when he hit 200, that would be noteworthy, but being the only one currently? It's a passing fancy.
 

NJ22

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
894
Yeah, I get that. It's just not very relavent to say he is the only one with that stat when others I am sure had it at one point but they have played longer and their INTs eventually got over that point. Now, if he was the only one to have under 100 INTs when he hit 200, that would be noteworthy, but being the only one currently? It's a passing fancy.

uhh yeah ok.
 

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
How did some QBs have the same amount of INTs as TDs from the old days and still are in the HoF? I know I was too young to watch those days, but man that's terrible any way you slice it.

The reason why is because they played the game totally different. The way you played football back then was to run, run, run and throw only on third and long or when trying to catch the other team off guard. When you did throw, you threw a BOMB... none of this west coast, dink and dunk stuff.

Look at the all-time leaders for yards per completion:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_yds_per_cmp_career.htm

See how far you have to go down to find an active player?
 

john van brocklin

Captain Comeback
Messages
40,159
Reaction score
45,293
I think what is so much different, is the DB's could really beat the snot out of wr's and knock them down and mug them. So a QB might put up a pass and by the time it came down his receiver was unconscious and Mel Blount was running the other way with his pass.

LOL !!!! TRUE !!!!! The old Oakland Raiders were a bunch of thugs in the secondary !
 
Top