Romo or Brees

[pancakeman]

There was definitely some kind of dynamic regarding Romo, week-long preparation, and in-game adjustments that did not apply to any other successful QB.

I feel like he would often overthrow receivers at the beginning of games because he was so jacked up. His competitive instinct which served him so well in those close fourth-quarters also seemed to make him overexcited in the first. Favre was similar as I recall.

 

[jobberone]

Brees on a mature team O/W Romo.

 

[aikemirv]

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?

I think they are a lot of the same QB. I could not honestly put Romo over Brees but I do think he was as good a player in his prime.

 

[DFWJC]

Romo's "slow starts" separate him from all the elites, including Brees.

Career 1st quarter
Rodgers 107.9
Manning 101.2
Brees 97.7
Brady 97.6
Romo 83.4

Career rest of game (diff)
Rodgers 102.6 (-5.3)
Romo 100.8 (+17.4)
Brady 96.9 (-0.7)
Brees 96.3 (-1.4)
Manning 95.0 (-6.2)

Definitely stands out.
Some would argue it took him a quarter to overcome our dumb gameplans
Others would say, as a student of the game, it took him awhile to disect what the oppossing game plan was.

Either way, these stats run counter to the silly and uninformed narrative that he was not a closer.
Exact opposite, actually

This also reminds us how insanely good Rodgers is.

 

[amame25]

Ahhh yes. The typical hypotheticals that no one can prove or dis prove. This holds zero weight. Fact is, Brees had a much better career.

And did Romo ever beat Brees head to head?

Like in arm wrestling? I'm pretty sure they never played "head to head". I'm don't recall either one of them running out to make a sack or pick up an interception.

 

[mmohican29]

Brees all day.

I once posted on here that Brees' career is what Romo's should have been- because he kept himself in physically excellent shape and ready for each season. Romo was one of the more athletic to play the position and absolutely a better athlete than Brees- until the injuries.

I will say that Romo's ceiling was higher and when he played his absolute best ball, it was better than Brees. But Brees was more consistent and ready for each season phyically.

Tony got soft far too often, and it probably cost him a SB Ring. It at least contributed.

 

[G2]

Definitely stands out.
Some would argue it took him a quarter to overcome our dumb gameplans
Others would say, as a student of the game, it took him awhile to disect what the oppossing game plan was.

Either way, these stats run counter to the silly and uninformed narrative that he was not a closer.
Exact opposite, actually

This also reminds us how insanely good Rodgers is.

To be fair, Romo had his fair share of not being a closer. It goes both ways.

 

[percyhoward]

I feel like he would often overthrow receivers at the beginning of games because he was so jacked up. His competitive instinct which served him so well in those close fourth-quarters also seemed to make him overexcited in the first. Favre was similar as I recall.

Favre was Romo's hero, and although there were obvious parallels in their approach to the game, Favre's pattern was typical of those other QB I listed above: a 90.9 rating the 1st qtr, 84.9 the rest of the game. I can't find the quote, but at some point Romo addressed his slow starts by saying that it took him some time to figure out what defenses were doing in a game. I think he (and frankly his team) relied more on the cerebral aspect of quarterbacking than his peers had to -- or were able to -- for the most part.

 

[Kevinicus]

One thing MArcus has proven he is not is a troll. Disagreeing with you is not the definition of a troll.

I think being a troll is the only thing Marcus has proven. Time and time again.

 

[DFWJC]

To be fair, Romo had his fair share of not being a closer. It goes both ways.

A few notable cases out of many years...but yes, true.

Hey, one season Brady had FOUR games where he threw a late 4th quarter, last drive, interception here hitm lost.
It happens.
Just for perspective, Romo (a lessor QB) had maybe 5-6 of those in his entire career. Its just that they get ingrained in our minds.

The fact his late game-winning drives far outweighted those blunders.

Old news though

 

[OmerV]

Thanks OmerV. I can handle being called a troll but there was a guy on here who once accused me of being an Eagles fan. That one hurt. 40 minute steaming shower and called my therapist to get me through that day. Finally turned a corner after 3 months.

What do you have against Hotel California?

Sorry .... yep, that Eagles fan accusation was a pretty low blow. I just have a problem with people who notably exaggerate and think that laying extreme claims or accusations somehow strengthens their argument. Even if a poster is unreasonable that doesn't necessarily make them a troll.

 

[G2]

A few notable cases out of many years...but yes, true.

Hey, one season Brady had FOUR games where he threw a late 4th quarter, last drive, interception here hitm lost.
It happens.
Just for perspective, Romo (a lessor QB) had maybe 5-6 of those in his entire career. Its just that they get ingrained in our minds.

The fact his late game-winning drives far outweighted those blunders.

Old news though

I agree, the timing stands out when an equally important foul up in the 2nd quarter goes unnoticed. Same with any player really. But I do see unrealistic expectations toward Dak that Romo had when he was playing. The difference now is that Romo isn't playing anymore and they're now excuses Dak doesn't have.
Fans went on and on about how bad our defense was or that Romo never had an O line. That was in defense of him not performing well enough to win. And they certainly played a role collectively. But Daks rookie season GB playoff game was pretty good. He did well. AR ate up our defense but now that isn't an allowable excuse. Same with the offense last season.
Did ANYONE on offense have a great year? No. LT was up and down, LG was garbage, RT was up and down, RB was out for 6 and when we were missing Lee the team was substantially weaker.

 

[OmerV]

I think being a troll is the only thing Marcus has proven. Time and time again.

Then we will agree to disagree. I think calling him a troll is just a way for those that have disagreements to try and make him look bad. It's a common practice on these sites, not unlike those that claim that unless a poster is willing to bash a coach for everything from the way he stands on the sidelines to the color of his hair then he has to be a "Garrett Lover" who thinks the coach can do no wrong. It's making an extreme, and illogical accusation.

 

[G2]

Then we will agree to disagree. I think calling him a troll is just a way for those that have disagreements to try and make him look bad. It's a common practice on these sites, not unlike those that claim that unless a poster is willing to bash a coach for everything from the way he stands on the sidelines to the color of his hair then he has to be a "Garrett Lover" who thinks the coach can do no wrong. It's making an extreme, and illogical accusation.

That's his "go to."

 

[percyhoward]

This also reminds us how insanely good Rodgers is.

He's right up there, but that was posted mainly to show the differentials. If you're focusing on the rating itself, keep in mind that the guy whose career started the latest and who is still active will get the biggest bump in the raw rating, which will continue to benefit Rodgers the most and Manning the least.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I think being a troll is the only thing Marcus has proven. Time and time again.

He’s also proven he can be wrong a lot, and that he isn’t exactly the bravest fellow.

 

[OmerV]

He’s also proven he can be wrong a lot, and that he isn’t exactly the bravest fellow.

Even if a poster is wrong, that's not what defines a troll. People falsely accusing someone of being a troll are really acting more troll-like.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Even if a poster is wrong, that's not what defines a troll. People falsely accusing someone of being a troll are really acting more troll-like.

He wasn’t a troll because he’s wrong, he’s a troll because he’s a troll.
There’s a lot of Chatty Pattys on this site. Sometimes when I see people having a discussion, it’s tempting to get involved, especially when I see someone who I am friends with involved. But unless someone is spreading misinformation, I don’t get involved. If more people took that advice, we wouldn’t have these megathreads going on forever. But like I said, lotta Chatty Pattys.

 

[OmerV]

He wasn’t a troll because he’s wrong, he’s a troll because he’s a troll.
There’s a lot of Chatty Pattys on this site. Sometimes when I see people having a discussion, it’s tempting to get involved, especially when I see someone who I am friends with involved. But unless someone is spreading misinformation, I don’t get involved. If more people took that advice, we wouldn’t have these megathreads going on forever. But like I said, lotta Chatty Pattys.

Being wrong, or chatty, or even downright illogical is still not the definition of a troll. A person can be as illogical or unreasonable as they can be and still not be a troll. Marcus purpose isn't to be here just to disrupt the website or stir up nonsensical crap or push a hidden agenda. He discusses and makes his points, and like everyone here, sometimes is right on point and sometimes can be off base. And, of course, whether a poster is on point or off base is often subject to the reader's personal beliefs and biases and knowledge. I am discussing this because I have seen the same accusation tossed out at me for the same reason - just because the accuser has a firm disagreement with my viewpoint. It's a nonsense accusation.

 

[starfan1]

this is even a question? Brees 10 times out of 10.