Romo Stats Not Stans

[ufcrules1]

This, to me, is why the best comparisons are based on wins/loses and Super Bowls. To many variables otherwise. JMO

Yes, but it has been explained time and time again on this forum that you can't judge a QB off of wins/loses and super bowls, you need to look no further than his individual stats. If he has good stats then that has to mean that the team around him is the reason he doesn't have post season success.

 

[Vtwin]

I don't believe I am. I am simply stating an obvious fact. This entire thread is about comparison. You can't compare unless you consider events in broader terms. We do not live in a vacuum. This, to me, is why the best comparisons are based on wins/loses and Super Bowls. To many variables otherwise. JMO

An example that would illustrate my point would be how we got to compare the two completely different styles of Drew Bledsoe and Tony Romo..

Pocket passer Bledsoe was getting destroyed and the offense was going nowhere.

Tony Houdini Romo comes into the game and almost pulls that one out and leads the team to the playoffs.

The only variable here is who was taking the snaps. I don't think you can really compare individual performance unless you remove the variables.

Brady is a top notch QB. Top three no argument. The reason he hasn't won a championship in almost a decade is because of those variables. Welker dropping a ball. Samuels not making the catch. Those variables cost the Pats another championship or two. No reflection on Brady's play.

In fact, Brady is a far better QB today then when he won his rings behind a top notch defense. Not saying he wasn't good back then. Just saying that if you judge a QB based completely on wins/losses and even worse, Super Bowls you are including a whole lot of variables that are completely unrelated to the QB play in your evaluation of the QB play.

 

[Vtwin]

Yes, but it has been explained time and time again on this forum that you can't judge a QB off of wins/loses and super bowls, you need to look no further than his individual stats. If he has good stats then that has to mean that the team around him is the reason he doesn't have post season success.

How do you explain the Pats lack of a Championship in almost ten years?

Is Flacco a better QB than Brady?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Comparing QB's based on wis/loses and Super Bowl wins is naive and BSPN'ish. The NFL is the ultimate team sport.

Right, that's why everybody in the NFL bases judgement on QBs, based on Wins/Loses and Super Bowl Wins.

Spare me your insight. I find it lacking.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

An example that would illustrate my point would be how we got to compare the two completely different styles of Drew Bledsoe and Tony Romo..

Pocket passer Bledsoe was getting destroyed and the offense was going nowhere.

Tony Houdini Romo comes into the game and almost pulls that one out and leads the team to the playoffs.

The only variable here is who was taking the snaps. I don't think you can really compare individual performance unless you remove the variables.

Brady is a top notch QB. Top three no argument. The reason he hasn't won a championship in almost a decade is because of those variables. Welker dropping a ball. Samuels not making the catch. Those variables cost the Pats another championship or two. No reflection on Brady's play.

In fact, Brady is a far better QB today then when he won his rings behind a top notch defense. Not saying he wasn't good back then. Just saying that if you judge a QB based completely on wins/losses and even worse, Super Bowls you are including a whole lot of variables that are completely unrelated to the QB play in your evaluation of the QB play.

Bledsoe was about a hundred years old and well passed his prime. However, Bledsoe did play in this same offense when he was younger and he did OK. I think that the example needs to consider the stages of each players career.

 

[ufcrules1]

Right, that's why everybody in the NFL bases judgement on QBs, based on Wins/Loses and Super Bowl Wins.

Spare me your insight. I find it lacking.

I was actually be facetious in my post.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yes, but it has been explained time and time again on this forum that you can't judge a QB off of wins/loses and super bowls, you need to look no further than his individual stats. If he has good stats then that has to mean that the team around him is the reason he doesn't have post season success.

This board is not the be all, end all. Do not pull me into this childish behavior by using these tactics, please. I am not interested in a holy war with the Romo Faithful or the Romo Anti Christ factions.

I say what I see and what my opinion dictates. In the end, Wins and Loses and Championships are what QBs are judged by, fairly or unfairly. Can't change that.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Right, that's why everybody in the NFL bases judgement on QBs, based on Wins/Loses and Super Bowl Wins.

Spare me your insight. I find it lacking.

Give me a break. QB wins and losses are a joke and don't stand up to any scrutiny at all. They aren't even a real stat. How do you get one?

Unless you are willing to support Mark Sanchez with 4 playoff "wins" (on the road no less) being better than most of the quarterbacks in the NFL, there really is no defense of them. If you don't think Sanchez is better than Romo and Ryan then you don't believe in them... because 4 times the wins of the other guy is not insignificant.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Give me a break. QB wins and losses are a joke and don't stand up to any scrutiny at all. They aren't even a real stat. How do you get one?

Unless you are willing to support Mark Sanchez with 4 playoff "wins" (on the road no less) being better than most of the quarterbacks in the NFL, there really is no defense of them. If you don't think Sanchez is better than Romo and Ryan then you don't believe in them... because 4 times the wins of the other guy is not insignificant.

I will Give you a break, as you have asked. I will ignore this post and pretend that it was never sent. In that way, I can save us both a lot of time.

Consider your break given.

 

[Vtwin]

Bledsoe was about a hundred years old and well passed his prime. However, Bledsoe did play in this same offense when he was younger and he did OK. I think that the example needs to consider the stages of each players career.

If we were trying to compare a young Bledsoe to the current Romo, yes.

If we were trying to compare one current QB to another than no.

Bledsoe did not play on the 2005-06 Dallas Cowboys offense when he was younger.

 

[ufcrules1]

This board is not the be all, end all. Do not pull me into this childish behavior by using these tactics, please. I am not interested in a holy war with the Romo Faithful or the Romo Anti Christ factions.

I say what I see and what my opinion dictates. In the end, Wins and Loses and Championships are what QBs are judged by, fairly or unfairly. Can't change that.

Again, I was just joking around with that post. I'm not childish and nor am I part of the "Romo Christ Anti Christ factions". I'm sorry that my opinion of Romo doesn't jive with some of the Romo faithfuls on the website but that doesn't make me childish.

 

[Aurican]

Hey, these guys were YOUR examples of how great players always play their best in the biggest games. Flacco is an example of a non-great player who does that. Peyton is an example of a great player whose record in that area is decidedly mixed. You're not doing your premise any favors with these examples.

No problem with my premise, where did I say that players can't become better? Peyton had a lot of issues in the playoffs earlier in his career but improved and was able to win a Super Bowl, Flacco has also improved.

 

[Rockport]

Right, that's why everybody in the NFL bases judgement on QBs, based on Wins/Loses and Super Bowl Wins.

Spare me your insight. I find it lacking.

NO ONE in the NFL basis their QB judgements on wins/losses and SB wins. Only the uninformed.

 

[Aurican]

Comparing QB's based on wis/loses and Super Bowl wins is naive and BSPN'ish. The NFL is the ultimate team sport.

Comparing QB's by individual stats is naive and simplistic, the QB's job is to run the entire offense and help his team win not rack up yards and completion percentages.

 

[Rockport]

Comparing QB's by individual stats is naive and simplistic, the QB's job is to run the entire offense and help his team win not rack up yards and completion percentages.

Totally agree.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If we were trying to compare a young Bledsoe to the current Romo, yes.

If we were trying to compare one current QB to another than no.

Bledsoe did not play on the 2005-06 Dallas Cowboys offense when he was younger.

No, he played in New England in basically the same offense, under Bill Parcells.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Again, I was just joking around with that post. I'm not childish and nor am I part of the "Romo Christ Anti Christ factions". I'm sorry that my opinion of Romo doesn't jive with some of the Romo faithfuls on the website but that doesn't make me childish.

The original post you responded to was not for you. The second that you responded to was. This "Wait, I've been told on this board" stuff only serves to lesson the discussion. I don't want to get involved with that stuff. I hear stuff on this board every day that I don't agree with. It is what it is.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

NO ONE in the NFL basis their QB judgements on wins/losses and SB wins. Only the uninformed.

Right, because you know people in the NFL right? Look, you don't want to agree on that, then don't agree but don't come in here and try and act like you know what's up and everybody else is, what was the word, "Naive" I think? Your opinion is no more valid then anybody elses and probably less so, IMO.

Spare me the insight. It is of little to no value to me. You want to disagree, disagree, but leave it at that.

 

[JD_KaPow]

No problem with my premise, where did I say that players can't become better? Peyton had a lot of issues in the playoffs earlier in his career but improved and was able to win a Super Bowl, Flacco has also improved.

You said yourself that Flacco isn't "great." Just asking that you keep your arguments straight. And Manning is 2-5 in the playoffs since his Super Bowl. I still don't see how either supports the cliche that "great players play their best in big games." Unless it's a tautology: guy plays great in a big game and therefore he's a great player. Until he isn't anymore.

 

[Rockport]

Right, because you know people in the NFL right? Look, you don't want to agree on that, then don't agree but don't come in here and try and act like you know what's up and everybody else is, what was the word, "Naive" I think? Your opinion is no more valid then anybody elses and probably less so, IMO.

Spare me the insight. It is of little to no value to me. You want to disagree, disagree, but leave it at that.

I think I did disagree and left it at that. You are the one getting all bent out of shape because I disagreed with you.