Romo or Brees

[Diehardblues]

Smart man. You get it.
Since Romo has thrown over 4,000 career passes there is no sample size issues. It is not “easier” for Romo to have a higher yards per attempt, the number simply is what it is. The only argument that could be made is that Brees numbers are (very, very) slightly more reliable than Romo’s because of the increased sample size. But since both men have thousands of attempts, the reliability difference is basically zero.

I don’t have a problem with that reasonable conclusion. Like I said in one of these post, for a few select years Romo played at a high level.

But to assume the reliability factor is zero appears to be more of an analyzing determination or opinion that what I’d call an absolute. Which is fine. That’s what we do here.

Romo’s numbers and sample size defenitely provide enough to present the argument.

 

[CowboyFanInLexKy]

This isn't an outlandish question if you look deeper into the stats. Romo had less support.

Actually this is an outlandish question because there are no "stats" that say how much support Romo had... If you're going by stats. there would be no question, I would go with Brees but to support your agenda, I can go with Romo...

 

[Future]

I'm taking Romo and I don't think it's even close.

Not even reading the 12 pages of opinions lol

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Yes 90%=90%, but he has it completely backwards, the "actual feat" of going 900/1000 or 900,000/1,000,000 is significantly harder or it would have been accomplished numerous times.

When has a person ever got to throw 1000 passes or more under the exact same conditions as when they went 9-10 in the second quarter of a random game? That makes no sense.
Think of it this way. Is it harder for Steph Curry in an empty gym to make 9 out of 10 free throws or 90 out of 100, assuming no fatigue?

 

[Diehardblues]

If you admit that a small sample size means numbers aren't very reliable, then how can you say a small sample size equates to exactly the same thing as a large sample size if the percentage is the same?

The reality is, the bigger sample size reflects a consistency that a smaller sample size does not, and maintaining consistency over time and over more passing attempts is, without question, harder than maintaining consistency over a shorter time period with fewer passing attempts.

They’re both sound arguments .

Gayle Sayers sample size was only about 5 years due to injury but his enourmous talent is undeniable . Bo Jackson another one near that description.

I think it’s entirely possible to come to a reasonable conclusion if Romo had played for close to 18 years as Brees has or coming close to( I haven’t looked it up) then Romo’s career numbers could have been much closer since Romo did play at a high level for much of the 7 full seasons he was healthy.

 

[Kevinicus]

What did people used to say about John Elway and those Superbowls of his in the 80's? Granted that he didn't win those, but back in the day people would say that it was all him, carrying the team to those bowls. Also, it doesn't just have to be a team having a single player on it, but I do think there are some players that win you championship, because they have that it factor to win championships. anyway just a personal belief of mines I guess.

Just because people say something stupid, it doesn't mean you need to believe it.

 

[mcmvp]

Only on a Cowboys forum would this ever begin to be debated...and that’s where the answer lies.

Brees

 

[Diehardblues]

It is not easier to go 8 for 10 than 80 for 100. It is exactly the same feat. You are confusing sample size and volatility for something else.

My money is on the guy who already hit 80 not the other guy who needs to hit the same percentage on his next 90.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I don’t have a problem with that reasonable conclusion. Like I said in one of these post, for a few select years Romo played at a high level.

But to assume the reliability factor is zero appears to be more of an analyzing determination or opinion that what I’d call an absolute. Which is fine. That’s what we do here.

Romo’s numbers and sample size defenitely provide enough to present the argument.

The thing is, I was never trying to say that Romo’s stats were as reliable as Brees (though they are) or that you could project Romo’s stats to Brees given more attempts. I was rejecting the idea that it was easier for Romo to have a higher completion percentage because he had less attempts. It makes no sense.

 

[Diehardblues]

Yes 90%=90%, but he has it completely backwards, the "actual feat" of going 900/1000 or 900,000/1,000,000 is significantly harder or it would have been accomplished numerous times.

Like I responded above.

I’m going with the guy who’s already hit 90 of 100 not the guy who’s only hit 9 of 10. The odds he maintains that percentage on his next 90 are slim.

 

[Diehardblues]

The thing is, I was never trying to say that Romo’s stats were as reliable as Brees (though they are) or that you could project Romo’s stats to Brees given more attempts. I was rejecting the idea that it was easier for Romo to have a higher completion percentage because he had less attempts. It makes no sense.

I understand. Sometimes these threads get twisted but since it’s been introduced and we’re knee deep in it. Ha

Of course it does matter as the example I provided with your 8 out 10 compared to 80 out of a 100.

Who are you going with?
The guy who’s already hit 80 of 100 or the guy that has to hit his next 72 out of 90?

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I understand. Sometimes these threads get twisted but since it’s been introduced..

Of course it does matter as the example I provided with your 8 out 10 compared to 80 out of a 100.

Who are you going with?
The guy who’s already hit 80 of 100 or the guy that has to hit his next 72 out of 90?

The guy who hit 80 obviously, but that is a different question. I said it was no easier (or harder), not who I thought was better. And I would definitely stop caring once they had both attempted thousands anyway.

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

Ask 100 non-Cowboys fans this question and see what results you get.

This! most would ask if this was a joke question.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

This! most would ask if this was a joke question.

Maybe. But not only is it a logical fallacy, most non-Cowboy fans think that Romo has about an 80 QB rating and is the all-time NFL leader in interceptions thrown (most of them occurring in the 4th quarter).

 

[OmerV]

They’re both sound arguments .

Gayle Sayers sample size was only about 5 years due to injury but his enourmous talent is undeniable . Bo Jackson another one near that description.

I think it’s entirely possible to come to a reasonable conclusion if Romo had played for close to 18 years as Brees has or coming close to( I haven’t looked it up) then Romo’s career numbers could have been much closer since Romo did play at a high level for much of the 7 full seasons he was healthy.

The arguments contradict each other. Obviously Sayers talent couldn't be denied, but his is a different situation because of his injury history, which deprived us of the chance to see if he could have maintained the performance over a longer period the way Payton or others did.

What we are talking about with Romo and Brees isn't simply about the career sample size being smaller, but the game in game out, year in year out number of throws In Romo's most efficient season he averaged less than 30 throws a game, and in others around 32-33, whereas Brees might average 40-42, thereby having to carry a bigger part of the offensive load for his team, and thereby increasing the odds of throwing INT's, and thereby increasing the chance of defenses pinning back their ears to rush a QB they know will throw 65% of his team's offensive plays.

 

[Diehardblues]

The guy who hit 80 obviously, but that is a different question. I said it was no easier (or harder), not who I thought was better. And I would definitely stop caring once they had both attempted thousands anyway.

It’s a question which creates caution and doubt in your comparison. I’m glad to see you agree .

And that doesn’t mean the other could have gone on to shoot a better percentage or that the smaller sample necessarily represents not as talented or effective. Just not as proven over a longer sample size.

Been a pleasure corresponding with you sir!

 

[Whyjerry]

Keep in mind that football is a team sport. Thus, Brees may have more playoff wins, yet it doesn't automatically= " Better".

In their prime, who would you rather have? Furthermore, who was better in your opinion?

Is this a joke? It has to be a joke. Brees is on a whole other level. He is one of the best to ever play the position. Romo? Good player.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

The arguments contradict each other. Obviously Sayers talent couldn't be denied, but his is a different situation because of his injury history, which deprived us of the chance to see if he could have maintained the performance over a longer period the way Payton or others did.

What we are talking about with Romo and Brees isn't simply about the career sample size being smaller, but the game in game out, year in year out number of throws In Romo's most efficient season he averaged less than 30 throws a game, and in others around 32-33, whereas Brees might average 40-42, thereby having to carry a bigger part of the offensive load for his team, and thereby increasing the odds of throwing INT's, and thereby increasing the chance of defenses pinning back their ears to rush a QB they know will throw 65% of his team's offensive plays.

You are making a lot of assumptions. There is zero evidence that passing the ball more leads to less efficiency. For every speculative “pinning your ears back moment” that you could come up with, I could counter with Brees padding his stats against an overmatched and tired defense like the 49-17 whooping the Cowboys received from them a few years back. And I’ll point out again, the QBs last year that had the fewest attempts were the worst ones, not the best.
And who has padded their stats more than Drew Brees? Drew Brees has thrown for over 1450 yards and 10 TDS while leading by 2 TDS or more in the 4th quarter. Romo has 5 TDS and 663 yards.

 

[Diehardblues]

The arguments contradict each other. Obviously Sayers talent couldn't be denied, but his is a different situation because of his injury history, which deprived us of the chance to see if he could have maintained the performance over a longer period the way Payton or others did.

What we are talking about with Romo and Brees isn't simply about the career sample size being smaller, but the game in game out, year in year out number of throws In Romo's most efficient season he averaged less than 30 throws a game, and in others around 32-33, whereas Brees might average 40-42, thereby having to carry a bigger part of the offensive load for his team, and thereby increasing the odds of throwing INT's, and thereby increasing the chance of defenses pinning back their ears to rush a QB they know will throw 65% of his team's offensive plays.

True.. regarding Sayers. Which Romo’s shortened career to injury could also be a similar argument assuming you agreed his talent level or effectiveness and production was similar to Brees in his Abbreviated time.

 

[Diehardblues]

You are making a lot of assumptions. There is zero evidence that passing the ball more leads to less efficiency. For every speculative “pinning your ears back moment” that you could come up with, I could counter with Brees padding his stats against an overmatched and tired defense like the 49-17 whooping the Cowboys received from them a few years back. And I’ll point out again, the QBs last year that had the fewest attempts were the worst ones, not the best.
And who has padded their stats more than Drew Brees? Drew Brees has thrown for over 1450 yards and 10 TDS while leading by 2 TDS or more in the 4th quarter. Romo has 5 TDS and 663 yards.

This is a fair rebuttal. More doesnt necessarily compute to better although it could pad the stats if compiled at the same percentage. All worthy considerations!

All of the contributing factors which can skew how we evaluate and compare these ratings on QB’s further cloud how reliable the stats are.

We haven’t even addressed why so many of the Greatest HOf QB’s of all time aren’t near the top and why some QB’s we’d never place near the top are.

We’d have to begin at least begin to conclude that more passing leads to higher ratings unfortunately.