Would Giants fans rank Romo over Eli

[TheMarathonContinues]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The problem is that, statistically, Eli has better numbers in yards and TDs then does Tony. Now, we all know that the major reason for this is that Eli has been a starter longer, even though he has been in the league one less year (Eli 12 seasons/Tony 13), but stat wise, that doesn't allow Tony to separate himself much from Eli. Add the two Super Bowls and you will never get writers to give the nod to Tony.

 

[Wheeltax]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

You're right, I say we go get Brad Johnson back

 

[zack]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

See that is the thing. If you were starting a team today, who do you pick? The QB that had won rings and the stats show that he had significant help or the one who is clearly better? Even several years ago, Romo has been the more consistent QB all along. To me, it is actually foolish that a NJ writer is even comparing the two QB's altogether in the first place. Eli is not a 10 QB, period. Shoot, it's hard to say that he is even a top 15 QB based on the way he has played over the past 3 years.

RankPlayer (age), + - HOFer, Bold - ActiveRateYearsTeams
1.Aaron Rodgers (31)106.0 2005-2014 gnb
2.Tony Romo (34)97.6 2004-2014 dal
3.Peyton Manning (38)97.5 1998-2014 2TM
4.Steve Young+ 96.8 1985-1999 2TM
5.Tom Brady (37)95.9 2000-2014
nwe
42. Eli Manning (34) 82.4 2004-2014 nyg

So, 40 spots on an individual stat doesn't mean Romo is the better QB?

 

[Doomsday101]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

Everyone wants rings but it is not just the QB who is responsiable for those rings taking place. Until the game is played by 1 person then success or failure goes well beyond the QB

 

[BIGDen]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

Was this a serious comment? Dilfer over Marino? Johnson over Fouts? The list goes on. Gimme a break.

 

[Rockport]

I can't imagine a team would rather have a quarterback with no rings over one with 2. No matter how lucky they may have been.

That's got to be the dumbest post ever made.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

That's your problem.
You just said "Eli beat Rodgers" and you don't even see the basic flaw in that statement.

I just noticed in one playoff game when "Eli beat Rodgers", that Eli had a 72 QB rating and zero TD passes.
He may have been one of the last reasons they won that game....yet HE beat Rodgers.
Beyond preposterous.

Its not a problem lol

I threw you that bone.

When it comes down to it. QB credit, QB blame.

So, yes, Eli beat Rodgers.

I dont remember, did Rodgers have interceptions in that game? oh yeah ONE!

Rodgers = 264 yards 2 TD's One INT

Eli = 330 yards 3 TD's and One INT


And I quote,
The Packers dropped passes, fumbled the ball and simply COUDNT STOP Eli Manning and his receivers in the Giants' shocking 37-20 divisional playoff victory Sunday. To the Giants' delight, a Green Bay team that had a real shot at an undefeated season less than a month ago is heading home.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

So, everything you just said is "I don't want to look too deep into things, I don't want to analyze, I just want to mimic the talking heads and put no thought behind my arguments"?

Thank you, I'm glad you are admitting to really have no basis for your argument outside of the "Eli - 2 SB rings, Romo - 0 SB rings"

Yes. Proven winner.
One. Maybe not.

Sorry. Until he wins, he has ALOT of bad sound bytes.

Fudgin New York Radio, one guy loves playing them.

I want it to STOP! My way is the ONLY way.

That is all!

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

this would make brad johnson, trent dilfer, and many others who relied on the team to win suddenly better than any other qb who never won a superbowl?

by your own line of (a-hem) logic, this would make dilfer better than:
kenny anderson
randall cunningham
boomer
jim kelly
warren moon
fouts
tarkenton
and ultimately:

marino.

but hold onto that turd of logic. nothing speaks volumes bout your own level of intelligence moreso than one of your posts.

You brought those guys into the discussion. I didnt.

One guy has nothing to do with the other. Nothing.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You're right, I say we go get Brad Johnson back

Brad Johnson has two rings?

That's got to be the dumbest post ever made.

Yes because Eli has NOTHING to do with getting those 2 rings. I've seen a lot of your posts on here so i'd probably say at WORST my post could be the 2nd dumbest post ever made.

Everyone wants rings but it is not just the QB who is responsiable for those rings taking place. Until the game is played by 1 person then success or failure goes well beyond the QB

I agree 100%. I think people got their feathers ruffled because of the statement I made. But I never said Eli was better than Romo or that he was a better QB. I'd personally much rather have Romo. But i'm not going to belittle the quarterback Eli is. Yes he's not his brother. But he's sure looked a lot more impressive in the post season than his brother has.

I don't hold Romo accountable for why this team hasn't had a ring. But I do believe he factors into that as well as coaches, personnel, defense, etc.

Was this a serious comment? Dilfer over Marino? Johnson over Fouts? The list goes on. Gimme a break.

I wasn't ranking the QB's. I'd personally rather have Romo but that's because i'm a Cowboy fan. A biased Giants fan i'm sure would rather have Eli who has two rings over Romo who doesn't have any.

But I also think its silly to compare Dilfer to Marino as if that comparison is on par with a Eli over Romo or vice versa. Romo and Eli are far closer in skill than Dan Marino and Trent Dilfer are. Let's don't kid ourselves.

See that is the thing. If you were starting a team today, who do you pick? The QB that had won rings and the stats show that he had significant help or the one who is clearly better? Even several years ago, Romo has been the more consistent QB all along. To me, it is actually foolish that a NJ writer is even comparing the two QB's altogether in the first place. Eli is not a 10 QB, period. Shoot, it's hard to say that he is even a top 15 QB based on the way he has played over the past 3 years.

RankPlayer (age), + - HOFer, Bold - ActiveRateYearsTeams
1.Aaron Rodgers (31)106.0 2005-2014 gnb
2.Tony Romo (34)97.6 2004-2014 dal
3.Peyton Manning (38)97.5 1998-2014 2TM
4.Steve Young+ 96.8 1985-1999 2TM
5.Tom Brady (37)95.9 2000-2014
nwe
42. Eli Manning (34) 82.4 2004-2014 nyg

So, 40 spots on an individual stat doesn't mean Romo is the better QB?

I never said Romo wasn't the better QB. The question asked would a Giants fan rather have Romo over Eli.....and I can't imagine why they would when Romo and his team doesn't have any rings and Eli has 2. Now we can sit here and argue why that is and i'm sure our arguments would be the same.

And Eli had decent help. In 2011, they had one of the WORST defenses in the league. Eli and his offense were atleast top 10. Romo statistically has had the better career but are we judging careers on stats or rings? If i'm starting a team today i'm picking Romo. No question. But i'm sure Giants fans feel differently and rightfully so.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

That's got to be the dumbest post ever made.

I beg your pardon. I have some that would make you scream.

 

[DFWJC]

Its not a problem lol

I threw you that bone.

When it comes down to it. QB credit, QB blame.

So, yes, Eli beat Rodgers.

I dont remember, did Rodgers have interceptions in that game? oh yeah ONE!

Rodgers = 264 yards 2 TD's One INT

Eli = 330 yards 3 TD's and One INT


And I quote,
The Packers dropped passes, fumbled the ball and simply COUDNT STOP Eli Manning and his receivers in the Giants' shocking 37-20 divisional playoff victory Sunday. To the Giants' delight, a Green Bay team that had a real shot at an undefeated season less than a month ago is heading home.

not the same playoff game I was referring to--Eli had 0 TDs and a 72 rating in the other one vs GB--but thanks for sharing that one.
And yes, I would not deny that he has a few nice games in the post season to go with his average and terrible ones.
The was that he could play really bad and they actually won a few of those anyway.

 

[DallasEast]

Why does it seem like Eli is the only QB people want to debate over romo?

Excellent question.

 

[iceberg]

You brought those guys into the discussion. I didnt.

One guy has nothing to do with the other. Nothing.

bull****.

if you're going to say only BLING matters, then this list fits your very narrow criteria, just not in the way you wanted it to. so no, i won't take 1 twisted fact by an agenda pushing poster who refuses to apply the very same logic in all situations. to NOT do that is self-serving, agenda based, and typical of todays society.

you wanna run around and say a lot of foolish things, go ahead. it's a free country and all. but you sure seem to get surprised when people notice it.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Everyone wants rings but it is not just the QB who is responsiable for those rings taking place. Until the game is played by 1 person then success or failure goes well beyond the QB

But if Romo ever win in the Super Bowl, for sure he will be anointed as our "Super Bowl-winning QB."

the QB is the leader, the on-field catalyst. He is like the boss, the CEO of a company. CEOs are fired ever day for company failures. It is never "the stock boy failed" and thus the company failed. No, it is the CEO who is blamed. Just as is the QB who get the crap or the glory when a Super Bowl is won or lost.

But Romo don't half to worry about "winning" or not winning a super bowl because at his age and with his back, it is really, really doubtful he will ever sniff a Super bowl. I hope i am wrong but we'll see and then you need to IM me and maybe send me a fruit basket because you will admit I am correct about Romo.

 

[Doomsday101]

But if Romo ever win in the Super Bowl, for sure he will be anointed as our "Super Bowl-winning QB."

the QB is the leader, the on-field catalyst. He is like the boss, the CEO of a company. CEOs are fired ever day for company failures. It is never "the stock boy failed" and thus the company failed. No, it is the CEO who is blamed. Just as is the QB who get the crap or the glory when a Super Bowl is won or lost.

But Romo don't half to worry about "winning" or not winning a super bowl because at his age and with his back, it is really, really doubtful he will ever sniff a Super bowl. I hope i am wrong but we'll see and then you need to IM me and maybe send me a fruit basket because you will admit I am correct about Romo.

If Romo and the Cowboys win a SB it will be because as a team and organization we were better than the rest. I beg to differ, the CEO does have control the QB however only controls the offense, he does not play defense nor special teams. He is important no doubt about it. The HC is the CEO

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Excellent question.

I think it's because they roughly started around the same time, they play within the division twice a year and the teams love to lay claim to having the best QB. If Philly or Washington ever get a decent QB, the same discussion will be had with those teams as well.

 

[mahoneybill]

Using this logic trent differ is a better qb than Dan Marino and on par with Peyton Manning. I would hope a sports journalist would use common sense and use all the different factors to come to an unbiased opinion.

Throw Brad Johnson into that mix also....

 

[DFWJC]

I guess I should answer the question;
regardless of how I compare the QB, you asked how do we think the Giants fans would rate them.
No doubt, they would rate Eli higher...imo.