Tony Romo Stats

[hmcorp]

Barring Injury at the end of the season Tony will be #1 in all statistical categories for QBs except for Super Bowl Wins, Playoff wins, overall wins and interceptions. I think.

Most yards, throws, tds etc.

 

[Nav22]

Not really. If the same can be said for defenses, -- and there's no reason to believe it can't -- then why are these more athletic, stronger, smarter defenses giving up higher passer ratings?

Because offenses have a natural advantage over defenses, in that they know what's coming while the D doesn't.

So when QBs keep getting better AND the rule changes help them, you'll see inflated passing numbers. It's not even shocking to see a rookie QB step into the league and start playing well in Week 1 anymore (although this year's been an exception to that).

Kickers are far better than they used to be. Ditto punters. Compare how many kickers are making 90% of their kicks in 2014 to the number just 10 years ago. Or the number of punters that average over 45 yards/punt. The difference is startling.

Wide receivers are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be. Ditto tight ends. I've seen some absolutely insane catches in recent years that simply didn't happen 20 years ago.

QBs of this era aren't getting credit for simply being better than they were in previous eras, and I think it's because we don't want to be disrespectful of the legendary QBs of yesteryear. Aaron Rodgers could waltz into a time machine and be the best QB in football in any era he wants to be, so long as the forward pass is legal. Guy has practically mastered the position, and it's a major stretch to assume it's ONLY because of the rule changes.

 

[percyhoward]

Thanks Percy. I had understood the years listed to be those in which they had top ten passer ratings. Do the listed years represent something other than that?

In any event, I guess I'm suggesting that yrs with a top 10 passer rating as a percentage of years as a starter might be a fairer metric, since the raw number of yrs as a top 10 passer doesn't account for the fact that QBs with fewer qualifying years will have had fewer opportunities. Your response suggests I'm missing something but I must confess I still don't see what it is I'm missing.

The logic behind listing the years was so that you could see which years they made the top 10, and which QB had gaps when they played (and you'd have to assume, started) and didn't make the top 10.

Your suggestion sounds like a list that, like mine, would still make sense despite an imperfection or two.

 

[percyhoward]

Because offenses have a natural advantage over defenses, in that they know what's coming while the D doesn't.

So when QBs keep getting better AND the rule changes help them, you'll see inflated passing numbers. It's not even shocking to see a rookie QB step into the league and start playing well in Week 1 anymore (although this year's been an exception to that).

Kickers are far better than they used to be. Ditto punters. Compare how many kickers are making 90% of their kicks in 2014 to the number just 10 years ago. Or the number of punters that average over 45 yards/punt. The difference is startling.

Wide receivers are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be. Ditto tight ends. I've seen some absolutely insane catches in recent years that simply didn't happen 20 years ago.

QBs of this era aren't getting credit for simply being better than they were in previous eras, and I think it's because we don't want to be disrespectful of the legendary QBs of yesteryear. Aaron Rodgers could waltz into a time machine and be the best QB in football in any era he wants to be, so long as the forward pass is legal. Guy has practically mastered the position, and it's a major stretch to assume it's ONLY because of the rule changes.

Kickers and punters face air, and while they've improved, air hasn't. It's gotten worse, I'm sure.

Offenses and defenses face each other, and one side wouldn't improve faster than the other without some help. No disrespect to Aaron Rodgers, who's one of the best ever.

 

[perrykemp]

Montana was actually awarded a basketball scholarship, but decided to play football. For those who remember his style of play he had some BB like moments in his movement, and passing.

Interesting. Makes sense actually.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

The logic behind listing the years was so that you could see which years they made the top 10, and which QB had gaps when they played (and you'd have to assume, started) and didn't make the top 10.

Your suggestion sounds like a list that, like mine, would still make sense despite an imperfection or two.

Fair enough.

 

[Galian Beast]

What's not true? Whether it was Julius and Barber, Tashard, Felix and Barber or Demarco and Felix....the run game has always been there. Now were we run first teams? No. But they've had decent lines and solid running backs here.

Again, look again, we've struggled mightily running the ball. Whether it was because of bad offensive linemen or running backs who couldn't stay healthy. You should probably look at the numbers, because you are way off base.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

Kickers and punters face air, and while they've improved, air hasn't. It's gotten worse, I'm sure.

 

[mahoneybill]

Interesting. Makes sense actually.

Thanks for sharing.

From Wikipedia regarding Joe Montana.

Montana showed potential as a basketball player and helped Ringgold win the 1973 WPIAL Class AAA boys' basketball championship while being named an all-state player.[14] He was so good that during his senior year, North Carolina State offered Montana a basketball scholarship.[4] Although Montana turned down the scholarship, he seriously considered NCSU because of a promise that he could play both basketball and football for the university.

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

Kickers and punters face air, and while they've improved, air hasn't. It's gotten worse, I'm sure.

Their jobs have gotten easier too: more indoor stadiums (or outdoor stadiums designed to control the influence of wind) and more consistent surfaces to kick from (in the case of kickers). All to say that even the improvements we've seen over time from kickers and punters can't be attributed solely to improved athleticism and technique.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Again, look again, we've struggled mightily running the ball. Whether it was because of bad offensive linemen or running backs who couldn't stay healthy. You should probably look at the numbers, because you are way off base.

So what are you using to state we "struggled" to run the football?
2007 - 4.2 YPC
2008 - 4.3 YPC
2009 - 4.8 YPC
2010 - 4.2 YPC
2011 - 4.4 YPC
2012 - 3.6 YPC
2013 - 4.5 YPC

Aside from the 2012 year where we started Demarco late and he got hurt where have we always struggled to run the football? There's never been a commitment too it. There was never a time where I said...."Wow.....our running backs are terrible". In regards to backs they've always have had solid ones with the worst year probably being 2012 when Felix was done and Demarco was a rookie.

 

[Galian Beast]

So what are you using to state we "struggled" to run the football?
2007 - 4.2 YPC
2008 - 4.3 YPC
2009 - 4.8 YPC
2010 - 4.2 YPC
2011 - 4.4 YPC
2012 - 3.6 YPC
2013 - 4.5 YPC

Aside from the 2012 year where we started Demarco late and he got hurt where have we always struggled to run the football? There's never been a commitment too it. There was never a time where I said...."Wow.....our running backs are terrible". In regards to backs they've always have had solid ones with the worst year probably being 2012 when Felix was done and Demarco was a rookie.

Averages mean very little when you have to give up on the run because it isn't consistent. Look up how many rushing touchdowns we've had and where that ranks. We haven't committed to the run in the past because the run failed very often. You clearly didn't watch those games.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Averages mean very little when you have to give up on the run because it isn't consistent. Look up how many rushing touchdowns we've had and where that ranks. We haven't committed to the run in the past because the run failed very often. You clearly didn't watch those games.

Okay so FIRST you tell me to look at the "numbers" and now you tell me "averages mean very little" lol. I "clearly" watched the games. I've been following this team for almost as long as I've been born. I'm going simply by the eye test. You were the one who told me to go look at the "numbers" and the numbers backed up what i've been witnessing. they have always had the personnel to run the football. Demarco didn't just find his game this year. He was just a pro bowler LAST season.

The run game wasn't as consistent as it is now. I agree with that. But the playcalling wasn't either. Very predictable run plays with this team. Not to mention that penalties also hurt our team which is another reason why you would abandon the run.

But personnel wise? They've always had running backs and a running game. They just either failed to use it or couldn't.

 

[bayeslife]

I think ranking are better Percy, however, they don't factor in post-season success.

Montana was incredible in the post-season. In my mind, that raises him up above Manning.

Montana also would not have won a single Superbowl with Peyton's defenses so...

 

[MissouriCowboy]

Dan Marino