Single most amazing Tony Romo statistic

[Bob Sacamano]

Yep, yep. You think the Bears got the Super Bowl last year because of Rex Grossman?? You think the Chargers went 14-2 last year because of Philip Rivers? See LT. Its all reciprocal. The QB needs good talent around him to be a success.

while that is true, you need a QB who can win games for you, meaning you need a very good QB if you plan to go far, as well as having a very good D

 

[Oldschool7]

It isn't fair to measure a quarterback by winning Super Bowls. To win the whole enchilada you need greatness at many positions.

HOWEVER, in an era of relative parity the quarterback position is the biggest difference maker by far.

Name any great quarterback of history and you'll see a guy won won more than he lost.

Tarkenton, Aikman, Namath, Boomer, Marino, Manning---they ALL won more than they lost.

You simply cannot say the same thing about great tackles or linebackers or even running backs.

We measure coaches by their W-L record and nobody questions it. I think it's just as fair to measure a quarterback the same way.

 

[Rack]

How many wins did Archie Manning have?


Silly thread. Silly thread maker.


No QB plays GREAT unless they have a good supporting cast. Period.

 

[Oldschool7]

Romo has lead this team to an elite W-L record without a dominant defense.

Many of the Cowboy defenses over the past decade were stingier than the Cowboy defense of the past two seasons--yet we did nothing but flounder.

 

[Rack]

It isn't fair to measure a quarterback by winning Super Bowls. To win the whole enchilada you need greatness at many positions.

HOWEVER, in an era of relative parity the quarterback position is the biggest difference maker by far.

Name any great quarterback of history and you'll see a guy won won more than he lost.

Tarkenton, Aikman, Namath, Boomer, Marino, Manning---they ALL won more than they lost.

You simply cannot say the same thing about great tackles or linebackers or even running backs.

We measure coaches by their W-L record and nobody questions it. I think it's just as fair to measure a quarterback the same way.

That's about the dumbest thing I've ever read.

A QB is a cog in the clock. The Coach is the one that puts the cogs together, sets the time, alarm, and makes sure it's running correctly.

No way in HELL is it the same thing.

 

[Rack]

Romo has lead this team to an elite W-L record without a dominant defense.

Many of the Cowboy defenses over the past decade were stingier than the Cowboy defense of the past two seasons--yet we did nothing but flounder.

When did I say only a defense matters?

It's a TEAM. A total team effort. You can't just have one or the other.

You're really having a hard time grasping this simple concept aren't you?

 

[Oldschool7]

Rack virtually every post you've made in this thread has been full of taunts and insults.

You clearly are threatened or something but I'm not going away.

I thought at one time that you were a very stout and articulate poster. I hope you haven't become a pile of mush that can only resort to slurs.

 

[Rack]

Rack virtually every post you've made in this thread has been full of taunts and insults.

You clearly are threatened or something but I'm not going away.

I thought at one time that you were a very stout and articulate poster. I hope you haven't become a pile of mush that can only resort to slurs.

That's the problem. You've only "thought" one time.

 

[cowboys19]

stop with the insults Rack, We all know Qb's get labeled with the win loss record, its not fair but its the truth, and it will stay that way.

 

[Oldschool7]

Thats because a Guard doesn't handle the ball virtually every play. ...Yes football is a TEAM game but very often its W/L record will always be attached to the HC and then the QB...

Well put Mansta

 

[ROMOSAPIEN9]

Big Ben won a superbowl as a rookie mostly just handing it off to the RBs.

Not so much dude.

The Steelers won their last superbowl in Roethlisberger's 2nd season.

RACK IT!!

 

[gbrittain]

Exactly.

Elway was one of the greatest of all time, but he couldn't win the big one till they got him some other players that would play.

On the other side of that coin, Trent Freakin' Dilfer has won a superbowl. Big Ben won a superbowl as a rookie mostly just handing it off to the RBs.


It's not "All" about the QB. Yes, the QB is important, but he is NOTHING w/o his teammates.

Like Aikman has said, the QB gets too much credit for wins and too much blame for losses.

But I guess OS knows more about the QB position then Troy Aikman.

You are reading too much into it IMO. Of course it is a team game. Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, John Elway, and insert great QB name here are not going to make it to the SuperBowl with a garbage surrounding cast.

You use John Elway as an example. Yes, he lost several SuperBowls before he won one with a great surrounding cast.

I wonder how many of those SuperBowls the Broncos lost with John Elway at the helm they would have even made it to without John Elway at the helm?

If you polled 32 NFL GMs and asked them which position is the single most important position on the field what do you think they would say?

I personally (could be wrong) think that the overwhelming majority would say QB?

What is your honest opinion on what you "think" the GMs would answer?

If you do not think that the QB is the single most important player on the field, then what single position do you think is the most important position on the field?

 

[Oldschool7]

gbrittain

You are right on target about GMs knowing their priorities.

They know how to read the standings.

The two unquestioned elite quarterbacks are undefeated.
The teams with the most unsettled quarterback are struggling badly.

Yes one can find a few exceptions but they are precisely that: exceptions to the prevailing rule.

If Rack was pressed to name great quarterbacks who were also losing quarterbacks he wouldn't get very far past Archie Manning.

 

[ROMOSAPIEN9]

You are reading too much into it IMO. Of course it is a team game. Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, John Elway, and insert great QB name here are not going to make it to the SuperBowl with a garbage surrounding cast.

You use John Elway as an example. Yes, he lost several SuperBowls before he won one with a great surrounding cast.

I wonder how many of those SuperBowls the Broncos lost with John Elway at the helm they would have even made it to without John Elway at the helm?

If you polled 32 NFL GMs and asked them which position is the single most important position on the field what do you think they would say?

I personally (could be wrong) think that the overwhelming majority would say QB?

What is your honest opinion on what you "think" the GMs would answer?

If you do not think that the QB is the single most important player on the field, then what single position do you think is the most important position on the field?

Kinda contradictory...but no matter.

Elway DID singlehanded take 3 teams to the super with a garbage surounding cast.

Steve Sewell....trash
Sammy Winder...trash
Mark Jackson...trash
Vance Johnson...trash
Ricky Nattiel...trash

Had some decent players on defense....but his offense was trash and he took them to the superbowl 3 times on his back alone.

The fact that they got creamed in all 3 of those superbowl shows 2 things....

1: You need a complete team to win a championship.
2: John Elway was friggin AWESOME!!!!!

 

[ndanger]

Hey - just like me - 7 yrs of college and a 4 yr degree!

Dang ya'll musta hit the classes hard. It took me almost 10 years to get my seven.

 

[ROMOSAPIEN9]

Dang ya'll musta hit the classes hard. It took me almost 10 years to get my seven.

whatchu talkin 'bout....I've been in the college of hard knocks for the past 20 years......graduation seems to be a myth.

 

[gbrittain]

Kinda contradictory...but no matter.

Elway DID singlehanded take 3 teams to the super with a garbage surounding cast.

Steve Sewell....trash
Sammy Winder...trash
Mark Jackson...trash
Vance Johnson...trash
Ricky Nattiel...trash

Had some decent players on defense....but his offense was trash and he took them to the superbowl 3 times on his back alone.

The fact that they got creamed in all 3 of those superbowl shows 2 things....

1: You need a complete team to win a championship.
2: John Elway was friggin AWESOME!!!!!

Yeah, that was kind of contradictory. Did not mean it that way.

Remove any player aside from Elway from those losing SuperBowl years and probably not much changes.

Remove Elway from the equation and like magic the Broncos are not even in the SuperBowl.

 

[Rack]

Name any great quarterback of history and you'll see a guy won won more than he lost.

Yes one can find a few exceptions but they are precisely that: exceptions to the prevailing rule.

If Rack was pressed to name great quarterbacks who were also losing quarterbacks he wouldn't get very far past Archie Manning.

You said to name ANY great QB in history, not several. I named one cuz he was the one that was at the top of my head. I've already proven you wrong, you didn't say name several. Sorry, since I've already proven you wrong, I'm not gonna bother going through the trouble looking up MORE QBs just cuz you decide to change the rules.

You've already backed off your statements anyway.

"Name any great quarterback of history and you'll see a guy won won more than he lost."

"Yes one can find a few exceptions but they are precisely that: exceptions to the prevailing rule."


And you mention the Colts and Pats. Sorry, but those those QBs play on great TEAMS. It's not all about the QB with them. It's all about their TEAM.


You gonna try and tell me Manning would win if he played for the Dolphins? Just change nothing but him and all of the sudden they're winners?

Sorry, No.


Football is a TEAM sport. Yes, QB is the most important player on the field (I've never said otherwise), but to give them credit or blame for wins and losses when they play the ULTIMATE TEAM SPORT is completely ignorant.

There have been superbowl winners with sorry QBs and Great QBs who didn't win a lot of games (Archie Manning is an example of that).

 

[Rack]

You are reading too much into it IMO.

Not reading too much into it. It's real simple, QBs get too much credit for wins and too much blame for losses.


If a Hall Of Fame QB agrees with that, why wouldn't you or anyone else?


But I guess Oldschool knows more about the NFL then Troy Aikman.


The problem with football today is BSPN and sportscenter over glorifying things that they shouldn't and over criticizing players that don't deserve it.

The media has sucked oldschool in, along with millions of other fans. Me? I don't watch ESPN anymore. If they show a cowboys game I literally watch it with the mute on.

No QB can be "Great" if the OL doesn't block, or if the TEs and WRs don't catch or run the right routes. There is absolutely NO denying that. Period.

If it was "All about the QB" then why did the colts spend a first round pick on Anthony Gonzalez? They've already got one of the greatest QBs to play the game, what do they need ANOTHER first round WR for? They've already got two, but it's all about the QB so why bother paying those WRs all that money when they've got Manning? SHouldn't they just be able to play an average WR out there and still excel?

Or is it because it's a team game and it's about improving the whole TEAM?

 

[Oldschool7]

I've already proven you wrong, you didn't say name several. Sorry, since I've already proven you wrong, I'm not gonna bother going through the trouble looking up MORE QBs just cuz you decide to change the rules.

Rack what can I say, my friend. I guess you've triumphed in regards to that statement.

Yes I do think the Dolphins would have a winning record right now if they had Manning but I guess all we can do is speculate about that.