Romo better than Big Ben and Eli? Child, pulease!

[AdamJT13]

I haven't looked up the stats, but in the same time span, I'll bet no one in the league has thrown more pick-6's than Romo.

And you'll be wrong. Romo has thrown five in his entire career (one in 2006, two in 2007, one in 2008 and one in 2009). There are a handful of teams every season that throw four of five, and about half the teams each season throw two or more. Favre threw four of them last season alone and has thrown seven since Romo took over for Bledsoe. Drew Brees also has thrown seven. Eli Manning has thrown six. There might be others who have thrown more, too.

Roethlisberger has thrown five. Cutler has thrown five, and he took over almost two months after Romo. Carson Palmer has thrown five, and he missed 12 games last year. Kurt Warner has thrown four, and he was a backup for most of 2006 (he threw another one in 2006, but it came a couple of weeks before Romo took over, by which time Warner had been benched). Even Peyton Manning threw three last year and has thrown four since Romo took over (plus one in the playoffs, which makes five).

In other words, just about every single quarterback who has thrown as many or more passes as Romo since he took over also has thrown as many or more pick-sixes as Romo.

 

[superpunk]

You get the stats that prove your point wrong and then need to "examine" them so that there is a fair comparison?

So because the stats didn't back up your point Adam needs to provide more stats until they support "the way you see it from here"?

You are obviously not seeing it correctly.

Well said, lol.

"Wait, these stats don't support my position. Please tweak them, and provide me with different numbers, until it supports my assertion. Thank you."

 

[AdamJT13]

How many of those games did their teams win?

They're all right around 33 percent. Romo's won three out of nine, Eli's won eight out of 23, and Roethlisberger's won eight out of 25.

Also, I'd be interested in knowing what "multiple" means? Two, three, four, etc.

Multiple means at least two. If you meant at least three, then it's four for Romo, six for Eli and nine for Roethlisberger (with one win apiece).

And when and in what situation did those interceptions occur? Were Hail Mary passes included in those multiple pick games?

I didn't research the game situation for each one. But I'm sure they include Hail Mary passes, if any, as well as passes that bounced off the receiver's foot.

 

[Nexx]

ive bagged on manning but im ready to admit defeat. he has been clutch in big games. ive defended tony up to this point, i cant defend him any longer. he still makes the same mistakes he made 3 years ago. that inexcusable. tony will never win a superbowl because he is too inconsistent from game to game. you have to be consistently good to win in the playoffs.

 

[tyke1doe]

Romo definitely deserves alot of criticism after last night. I don't worry about that at all. But I am sensitive to stupidity and nonsense knee-jerk statements. I think that may be what you're picking up on, here.

My response is a reaction to all the "Eli isn't a good quarterback" comments I see/I've seen on this forum. I don't think Eli is the greatest. But he's a good quarterback. But some wearing their Cowboy-colored glasses can't admit and won't see it.

Same with Ben Rothlisberger.

But I've always said as a Cowboys fan, I'll gladly be proven wrong. If Romo is a good/great quarterback, time will tell and I'll eat my words. But I don't think he - at this point of his career - is as good as Eli or Big Ben.

 

[tyke1doe]

You get the stats that prove your point wrong and then need to "examine" them so that there is a fair comparison?

So because the stats didn't back up your point Adam needs to provide more stats until they support "the way you see it from here"?

You are obviously not seeing it correctly.

No, the stats don't prove my point wrong. Do you know anything about stats?

You know the expression "lies, damned lies and statistics?"

Stats can prove anything.

Just because someone pulls a stat doesn't mean the stat is accurate or even in context.

Why do you think people question surveys and stats? When one has a question about stats and surveys, one examines methodology and then the circumstances surrounding stats.

I'm not saying AdamJT13's stats are inaccurate, but I'm sure even AdamJT13 understands the basis of my question regarding stats.

And I do remember stats were cited defending Roy Williams. But if those stats were so accurate why is Roy Williams (the safety) not a member of the Dallas Cowboys?

Again, if you want to be gullible and believe every statistic someone offers, be my guest. But I'm going to be a bit more skeptical.

 

[tyke1doe]

Well said, lol.

"Wait, these stats don't support my position. Please tweak them, and provide me with different numbers, until it supports my assertion. Thank you."

On the flip side, you just take them as Gospel without any analysis of those stats. Adam cites them, but he has provided no reference. I thought we all were to engage our own critical-thinking skills. Just because someone supports your argument, I guess they're right and that settles it?

"No reason to think for myself or use common sense. Adam did all my thinking and analysis for me. Therefore, you're wrong. Why? Because Adam said so. Good night!"

Be careful how you judge because you only condemn yourself.

 

[JonJon]

No, the stats don't prove my point wrong. Do you know anything about stats?

You know the expression "lies, damned lies and statistics?"

Stats can prove anything.

Just because someone pulls a stat doesn't mean the stat is accurate or even in context.

Why do you think people question surveys and stats? When one has a question about stats and surveys, one examines methodology and then the circumstances surrounding stats.

I'm not saying AdamJT13's stats are inaccurate, but I'm sure even AdamJT13 understands the basis of my question regarding stats.

And I do remember stats were cited defending Roy Williams. But if those stats were so accurate why is Roy Williams (the safety) not a member of the Dallas Cowboys?

Again, if you want to be gullible and believe every statistic someone offers, be my guest. But I'm going to be a bit more skeptical.

Stats, Schmats....all I know is that Romo sucks!

No seriously, he is a good QB, he just stinks up the joint at the most inopportune times, and when he stinks up the joint, he REALLY stinks up the joint.

 

[btcutter]

Exactly...

And with the second pick in the draft...The Philadelphia Eagles select Donovan McNabb out of Syracuse....

The First Pick was Couch....

3rd pick was Akili Smith......2/3 busts. That would be about 60-80 million dollars down the tubes. Ouch!

 

[hutru01]

Romo had a bad game no excuses. He clearly was not better that Eli last night. If you don't think Eli or Ben will have games simular to what Romo had last night then your wrong.

Right, they have bad games, but the big difference is that Big Ben and Eli have won big games when it counts. Clearly, Romo has not.

 

[superpunk]

On the flip side, you just take them as Gospel without any analysis of those stats. Adam cites them, but he has provided no reference. I thought we all were to engage our own critical-thinking skills. Just because someone supports your argument, I guess they're right and that settles it?

"No reason to think for myself or use common sense. Adam did all my thinking and analysis for me. Therefore, you're wrong. Why? Because Adam said so. Good night!"

Be careful how you judge because you only condemn yourself.

I didn't say anything in support of any statistics.

I just think you look like a fool for shifting the goalposts once your original notion was found to be on shaky ground. You didn't try to make a case that the numbers were wrong, you just got butt-hurt that they didn't support the point you were trying to make, and therefore you needed a new goal to shoot at.

 

[tyke1doe]

They're all right around 33 percent. Romo's won three out of nine, Eli's won eight out of 23, and Roethlisberger's won eight out of 25.



If you meant at least three, then it's four for Romo, six for Eli and nine for Roethlisberger (with one win apiece).



I didn't research the game situation for each one. But I'm sure they include Hail Mary passes, if any, as well as passes that bounced off the receiver's foot.

Thank you for the response.

First, I didn't hold Romo at fault for the foot pick.

Second, I'm interested in a comparison of yearly progression. Despite some on this board how think we shouldn't analyze stats, I would be interested in knowing in Big Ben's first year, how many multiple interception games he had, in his second year, in his third year.
The same would be for Eli and for Romo.

I think there's a big difference in comparing Eli's first year with Romo's second year or even Romo's second year with Ben's third year. Those facts make a difference between many elements go into a quarterback's turnover rate including years of experience.

I would expect a rookie quarterback to have more multiple pick games than I would a veteran of three years.

Having said that, I appreciate you coming through with the stats. You're one of the few who does. Then again, you got it like dat.

 

[Doomsday101]

Right, they have bad games, but the big difference is that Big Ben and Eli have won big games when it counts. Clearly, Romo has not.

Romo has played well vs top teams and Dallas has won aginst top teams. Yes Eli and Ben has rings I would hardly rave over the way Ben played in one of those SB but then SB is a team accomplishment.

When Romo plays bad I have no problem stating it and when he plays good say way. He had a bad game yesterday and it is up to him to get it turned back around that is what players do.

 

[btcutter]

No kidding...like Eli and Ben don't have bad games. I've seen Ben and Eli both look like total crap. Eli had a good game, Romo did not...no more, no less.

The BIG difference is that both Eli and Ben has a DEFENSE that save their *****.

Good QB put you in position to win even despite their poor performances but rest of the team still has to stand up.

Unfortunately, we don't have THAT D.

Honestly, Ray Lewis would have been worth 7-9 million a yr to us easily. He will bring some physical presence and MENTAL toughness to this D.

 

[tyke1doe]

I didn't say anything in support of any statistics.

I just think you look like a fool for shifting the goalposts once your original notion was found to be on shaky ground. You didn't try to make a case that the numbers were wrong, you just got butt-hurt that they didn't support the point you were trying to make, and therefore you needed a new goal to shoot at.

I didn't shift the goal post. It's no more shifting the goal post than when someone answers a question and then another asks a follow-up question.

It's called, say it with me, CRITICAL-THINKING SKILLS.

I deal with surveys and stats in my profession from time to time, and the one thing we're told is that you have to look behind surveys and stats for methodology, i.e., how were the stats compiled, what questions were asked, was the sample pool board enough, are the comparisons valid, etc.

Second, I have mad respect for AdamJT13. If I'm going to lose an argument to anyone, I don't mind Adam.

Third, did you honestly think I didn't think Adam would respond? If I had something to fear, why would I even ask the question. Remember, I'm the one who did ask the question. I don't wear my pride on my Internet sleeve. So whether I'm right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. But I'm no Cowboys homer either, defending Romo when he had a bad game. He was clearly outplayed by Eli. And to this point in both of their careers, Eli is the better quarterback. And he proved that last night.

Sorry if your butt aches for Romo, but it's a long season. And we'll see if he can grow to be the quarterback Eli is becoming.

 

[superpunk]

I didn't shift the goal post.

Absolutely you did, once you realized your initial poorly hatched ideas weren't holding up.

Premise 1: Tony throws more multi-INT games than Eli/Ben. False. OK, where do we go from there? Let's quibble over the meaning of "multiple" and suggest that maybe the other QBs are just getting multi-INT games because of hail mary attempts.



I have no problem with appropriate criticism of Tony's game LAST NIGHT - he was terrible. But when you try to extrapolate that out and demean his entire body of work just because he got outperformed by another NFC East QB LAST NIGHT, I think you're just being stupid.

Third, did you honestly think I didn't think Adam would respond? If I had something to fear, why would I even ask the question. Remember, I'm the one who did ask the question. I don't wear my pride on my Internet sleeve. So whether I'm right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. But I'm no Cowboys homer either, defending Romo when he had a bad game. He was clearly outplayed by Eli. And to this point in both of their careers, Eli is the better quarterback. And he proved that last night.

I'll be waiting for your next thread - "Jay Cutler a better QB than Ben Roethlisberger".

Should be great.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

People still saying they would take Eli Manning over Tony Romo, pretty interesting.

Tony Romo is a good Quarterback. He puts up great numbers and has won some big games during the "Regular Season".

However, I believe Eli Manning and Ben Rothliesberger are better than he is at this point.

To be fair, Eli Manning and Ben Rothliesberger have been blessed with very solid coaching.

Tony Romo was a starter for only half a season on under Bill Parcells and has been stuck with Wade Phillips and is underwhelming leadership since.

 

[tyke1doe]

Absolutely you did, once you realized your initial poorly hatched ideas weren't holding up.

Premise 1: Tony throws more multi-INT games than Eli/Ben. False. OK, where do we go from there? Let's quibble over the meaning of "multiple" and suggest that maybe the other QBs are just getting multi-INT games because of hail mary attempts.

Maybe the problem is your reading comprehension. This is what I said. You don't have to guess.

Yes, Eli and Ben will have bad games, but these multiple turnover games seem to be more common to Romo than either Eli or Ben. I'll be happy to be proven wrong with some stats, but that's the way I see it from here.

So, I use the word "seem" which means I'm not certain. Then I say I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

Does that sound like someone who is stating something emphatically?

Please, get a clue and learn how to interpret phrases and sentences. This is basically elementary stuff.

Moreover, asking how many interceptions in a game and under what circumstances is important to understanding the issue. Any person not totally deficient of critical-thinking skills understands this because all interceptions aren't equal.

Throwing a Hail Mary isn't the same as throwing a pick against the Pittsburgh Steelers when you need a score to win.

Anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty understands the difference.

I have no problem with appropriate criticism of Tony's game LAST NIGHT - he was terrible. But when you try to extrapolate that out and demean his entire body of work just because he got outperformed by another NFC East QB LAST NIGHT, I think you're just being stupid.

Well, at least you used the term "I think" as in "I think you're just being stupid."

That's not an emphatic statement. That's your opinion, such as you are entitled to.

But did it ever dawn upon you that seems is also an opinion? You know, a word that is used when one isn't certain?

Please, you got upset because I gave an opinion, and you don't like my opinion. Guess what? This isn't your forum. It's a forum for ALL Dallas Cowboys fans. It's a forum where we give our opinion.

If I wanted to state a fact I would do so. And I would support that fact by evidence. I offered my opinion, then asked to be proven wrong.

That's better than half the posters here who state opinion as fact and don't ask to be challenged on it.

I'll be waiting for your next thread - "Jay Cutler a better QB than Ben Roethlisberger".

Should be great.

A silly response to detract from my opinion.

We're talking about the Dallas Cowboys quarterback not the Bears quarterback. You have no interest in Cutler being compared to Rothlisberger. You do have an interest in Romo being compared to him and Eli, otherwise, you wouldn't have gotten all offended by my post.

Besides, I don't care about Cutler. I do care about Romo because he is the quarterback of my favorite team. And right now, when we need him to not give away a game, he can't seem not to do that.

Now, the next time Romo wins a big game and doesn't cough up the ball or make a boneheaded play, I'll gladly - I may have to type this in bold and large letters so you won't miss this line - I'll gladly await a post from you on how great Romo is.

As you said, "Should be great."

 

[superpunk]

You obviously weren't happy to be proven wrong. Because instead of just accepting it, you shifted the goalposts.

The Cutler-Roethlisberger comparison was just to illustrate how stupid your initial thread premise was - a head to head win/outperformance equates to being a better QB. I realize it's not a perfect parallel, but it's close enough.

 

[tyke1doe]

You obviously weren't happy to be proven wrong. Because instead of just accepting it, you shifted the goalposts.

Rrriiggghhttt! Because I offer challenges knowing that the stat master, AdamJT13, resides on this board? Because I just like calling myself out?

You lack critical-thinking skills and you like others thinking for you, which is why you think it's shifting the goal post.

It would be like me stating it appears there's more random violence in Washington, D.C. than Detroit and then asking to be proven wrong. Meanwhile you offer homicide stats for both D.C. and Detroit and then chastize me because I ask to examine the homicide stats.

You do know that all homicides aren't equal and a recitation of stats doesn't necessarily tell you of random violence?

But to you that would mean "shifting the goal post."

To anyone else with critical-thinking skills, it would be analyzing data.

The Cutler-Roethlisberger comparison was just to illustrate how stupid your initial thread premise was - a head to head win/outperformance equates to being a better QB. I realize it's not a perfect parallel, but it's close enough.

Actually, you're revealing your stupidity. How do you interpret I'm talking head-to-head comparison when I say that "it seems that Romo has more multiple interception games"?

The game last night was a catalyst for my observation/opinion. But my opinion was not based on the game alone.

Please, what you need to do is read more closely or go back to school and enroll in a reading comprehension course. It might help you in your ability to understand what one is arguing verse arriving at your own conclusions and interpretation based on what you think one is saying.