Yet Another QB Ranking - But This One Shocked Me Twice

[burmafrd]

KJJ must be a masochist the way he is getting owned right and left and keeps coming back for more.

 

[Clarkson]

I would have loved to see how Luck would have survived on the teams that Romo had when he first came in!

He hasn't had it much better, really. Poor line, no run game, and little defense. Sounds exactly like Tony's earlier years.

 

[KJJ]

To top it off, even if it was a real stat (it obviously is not) it would be an extremely stupid, useless stat. Behold:

If it was a useless stat Troy Aikman wouldn't be in the HOF. If it wasn't for Aikman's W/L record during the playoffs/SB's and vs Young, Kelly and Favre in the playoffs he wouldn't have sniffed the HOF because he didn't have the numbers and several HOF committee members have said it. What got Aikman voted into the HOF on the first ballot was his 11-5 playoff record, 3-0 SB record, his 7-1 playoff record vs Favre, Young and Kelly and his W/L record in the 90's that made him the winningest QB of that decade.

 

[KJJ]

Joe Flacco 2009 wild card game: 4-10, 34 yards, 1 INT, QB Rating 10.0. Gets the "win"

On the very same day...

Aaron Rodgers, 2009 wild card game: 28-42, 423 yards, 4 TD 1INT, QB Rating 121.4. Gets the "loss"

Gee, what a useful "stat" for evaluating QBs.

According to some FAN here the passer rating stat correlates to winning more than any other stat. Flacco won a playoff game with a 59.1 passer rating his rookie year vs Miami. The following year he won the playoff game you mentioned vs NE with a 10.0 passer rating. Romo lost a game to Denver in 2013 in which he had a passer rating of 140.0 so how useful is that stat? The game is about winning and that's how QB's are ultimately judged. NFL Network did a Mount Rushmore of QB's with a panel of experts and everyone of them left Peyton Manning off due to his 11-13 W/L record in the playoffs. Every stat is flawed a QB can play great and lose and they can have a poor passer rating and still win but ultimately QB's are judged by their W/L record in the regular season and playoffs. It's their W/L record that receives most the scrutiny especially in the games that matter most.

 

[KJJ]

In this article Jay Gruden says winning is the only way to evaluate a QB and a lot of head coaches feel that way. I heard Brian Billick and Steve Mariucci say the same thing. The most important QB stat is their W/L record/winning percentage.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ng-is-the-only-way-to-evaluate-a-quarterback/

 

[burmafrd]

In this article Jay Gruden says winning is the only way to evaluate a QB and a lot of head coaches feel that way. I heard Brian Billick and Steve Mariucci say the same thing. The most important QB stat is their W/L record.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ng-is-the-only-way-to-evaluate-a-quarterback/

sure. Is any of these guys currently coaching and how well are they doing? Lots of questions there that others would ask but you just lap it up because you want to believe that its all on the QB and no one else and therefore it justifies your hatred of Romo. And your infatuation with Eli- I bet you have a poster of him right over your bed.

 

[KJJ]

Look at Archie Manning's career a very good QB who got stuck on some extremely bad teams. Most felt had he been playing with the Steelers those years he would have won all those SB's Bradshaw did and be in the HOF but Manning didn't receive the accolades that Bradshaw and other winning QB's did because his teams sat home for the playoffs every year and his career W/L record was 35-103-3. It certainly wasn't all Manning's fault but QB's careers are judged by their W/L record regardless what kind of team they have. They're depended on making their teams better and winning games that's how they're judged. Jerry Rice doesn't have a W/L record vs Michael Irvin. Deion doesn't have a W/L record vs Darrel Green.

Dez won't be judged by how he stacked up vs Calvin Johnson head to head because none of those players are QB's. How an NFL QB measures up vs their peers in head to head matchups in big games will go a long way in determining their legacy. I mentioned Aikman's 7-1 playoff record vs Favre, Young and Kelly. Five of of those wins came in conference title games/SB's vs QB's who ended up in the HOF. Aikamn's great career was built on his W/L record during the 90's both in the regular season and playoffs which made him the winningest QB of that decade and a 3 time SB winner.

 

[DFWJC]

According to some FAN here the passer rating stat correlates to winning more than any other stat. Flacco won a playoff game with a 59.1 passer rating his rookie year vs Miami. The following year he won the playoff game you mentioned vs NE with a 10.0 passer rating. Romo lost a game to Denver in 2013 in which he had a passer rating of 140.0 so how useful is that stat? The game is about winning and that's how QB's are ultimately judged. NFL Network did a Mount Rushmore of QB's with a panel of experts and everyone of them left Peyton Manning off due to his 11-13 W/L record in the playoffs. Every stat is flawed a QB can play great and lose and they can have a poor passer rating and still win but ultimately QB's are judged by their W/L record in the regular season and playoffs. It's their W/L record that receives most the scrutiny especially in the games that matter most.

You actually just proved how dumb it sounds to say a QB "won" a game with those examples. Flacco's team winning a playoff game with a 10.0 rating should tell you that he basically had nothing to do with them winning that one. In fact, they won in spite of him being one of the worst players on the field that day.
However, the facts do show, generally, that a high QB rating correlates very well to winning. That's a simple proof.

And when Dallas scored 49 points and Romo played otherworldly vs Denver, he clearly was not the reason they lost. In fact, they almost certainly lose by 3+ TDs without him that day. Denver did not even punt one time.

 

[KJJ]

Every head coaches fate is in the hands of their QB if the QB is successful the HC will be successful. Their careers go hand in hand. Before Brady arrived Belichick was just another HC. He failed in Cleveland and was 5-11 in 2000 with Bledsoe. Like with QB's head coaches are judged on their W/L record their teams have to win or they'll be gone. Belichick started the 2001 season 0-2 until Brady took over and everything changed. The NFL is a QB driven league and their W/L record will determine their fate as well as their head coaches fate. Everyone knows wins and losses aren't totally on the QB but they do receive a lot of the credit and a lot of the blame it comes with being an NFL QB. It's not fair but with all the responsibility QB's have and with the large salaries they make it is what it is.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

You actually just proved how dumb it sounds to say a QB "won" a game with those examples. Flacco's team winning a playoff game with a 10.0 rating should tell you that he basically had nothing to do with them winning that one. In fact, they won in spite of being one of the worst players on the filed that day. However, the facts do dhow that a high QB rating correlates very well to winning for the most part.

And when Dallas scored 49 points and Romo played otherworldly vs Denver, he clearly was not the reason they lost. In fact, they almost certainly lose by 3+ TDs without him that day. Denver did not even punt one time.

True; QB rating usually gets the job done as a tool for winning; these are obviously outliers. But that's what makes the faux QB W/L stat such a poor stat. Even though pitching decisions aren't very good, there is at least something to them. A pitcher can win a game where he gives up 10 runs... but at the very least the pitcher has to put in 5 innings and be slightly less putrid than the other guy(s). For the QB "stat" there is literally no limit to how awful you can be. You could conceivably not even score or complete a single pass and still get a "win" on a defensive TD.

Or you can save the analysis and just say that Troy Aikman, Dan Marino and Steve Young have have 2 road playoff "wins" combined, while Mark Sanchez has 4 road playoff "wins" by himself. Either way, it's a useless stat for phony football fans and TV watchers.

 

[KJJ]

True; QB rating usually gets the job done as a tool for winning; these are obviously outliers.

In 2010 Romo was 1-5 and had a passer rating of 94.9. In 2011 he had a passer rating of 102.5 which was a career best at the time and the Cowboys only won 8 games. He never had a passer rating lower than 90.5 in 4 straight seasons and the Cowboys were 2 games below 500 during that period. The passer rating stat is a flawed stat just like all stats but a QB's career is ultimately judged by wins and losses.

 

[DFWJC]

In 2010 Romo was 1-5 and had a passer rating of 94.9. In 2011 he had a passer rating of 102.5 which was a career best at the time and the Cowboys only won 8 games. He never had a passer rating lower than 90.5 in 4 straight seasons and the Cowboys were 2 games below 500 during that period. The passer rating stat is a flawed stat just like all stats but a QB's career is ultimately judged by wins and losses.

"Romo" has never been 1-5. Dallas (not Romo) was 1-4 in games where Romo played the whole game in 2010. Dallas led in the 6th game vs NY when Romo got hurt.
Even though that's beside the point, it shows your bias even further.

It's like talking to a 3rd grader with you.

 

[5Stars]

"Romo" has never been 1-5. Dallas (not Romo) was 1-4 in games where Romo played the whole game. Dallas led in the 6th game vs NY when Romo got hurt.
Even though that's beside the point, it shows your bias even further.

It's like talking to a 3rd grader with you.

Can you believe that KJJ is 48 years old! lol

 

[KJJ]

True; QB rating usually gets the job done as a tool for winning; these are obviously outliers. But that's what makes the faux QB W/L stat such a poor stat.

Other than a QB's TD to turnover ratio their W/L percentage is the most viable stat there is. Can't believe anyone would down play a QB's W/L record. I pointed out Romo's losing record from 2010 to 2013 despite his high passer rating. I pointed out his 2010 record which was actually 1-4 due to the fact he was knocked out of the Giants game early with the Cowboys leading but the way that season was going he likely wouldn't have ended up more than the 6 wins the team finished with that season.

 

[5Stars]

Other than a QB's TD to turnover ratio their W/L percentage is the most viable stat there is. Can't believe anyone would down play a QB's W/L record. I pointed out Romo's losing record from 2010 to 2013 despite his high passer rating. I pointed out his 2010 record which was actually 1-4 due to the fact he was knocked out of the Giants game early with the Cowboys leading but the way that season was going he likely wouldn't have ended up more than the 6 wins the team finished with that season.

Oh...so now you mention the "team". smh

 

[DFWJC]

Just some won-loss trivia, seeing that is part of the topic.

Dallas has never had a losing season with Romo as the QB the majority of the season.
Not once.

Given some of the olines and defenses we put out there for at least half of those seasons, that is astounding.

For example, here are few QBs that cannot say that:

Peyton Manning
Drew Brees
Joe Montana
Troy Aikman
Ben Roethlisberger
Philip Rivers
Matt Ryan
Eli Manning

 

[DFWJC]

Just some won-loss trivia, seeing that is part of the topic.

Dallas has never had a losing season with Romo as the QB the majority of the season.
Not once.

Given some of the olines and defenses we put out there for at least half of those seasons, that is astounding.

For example, here are few QBs that cannot say that:

Peyton Manning
Drew Brees
Joe Montana
Troy Aikman
Ben Roethlisberger
Philip Rivers
Matt Ryan
Eli Manning

BTW

A couple of QBs that CAN say that are:

Roger Staubach
Tom Brady

 

[DanteEXT]

Didnt he post in the past that he NEVER puts anybody on ignore?

He put me on ignore over a joke.

 

[DFWJC]

Oh...so now you mention the "team". smh

It's comical how he selectively switches things to fit his agenda.
Things like "bright-light" games, elimination games, TD:turnover ratio (vs TD:int), "QB wins and losses", and now team playing bad so "he" would have losing season (though that has yet to happen in his career).

Nobody here is denying that playoff success often is the cherry on top for a QBs career. But he takes it to an exponentially whole new level.

 

[5Stars]

It's comical how he selectively switches things to fit his agenda.
Things like "bright-light" games, elimination games, TD:turnover ratio (vs TD:int), "QB wins and losses", and now team playing bad so "he" would have losing season (though that has yet to happen in his career).

Nobody here is denying that playoff success often is the cherry on top for a QBs career. But he takes it to an exponential whole new level.

Not that this means much, but I quickly scrolled through all the posts and aside from KJJ's first post, he has not got one "like" from anyone else so far regarding his convoluted thinking. lol

It's like that saying, "If 10 people tell you that you are drunk, you better sit down"!