Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 102
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Irvine, California
    Posts
    13,159
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    Romo: 77 GS, 47-30 (61%), 64.5 completion %, 20834 yards, 149 TDs, 5.7 TD%, 72 INT, 2.8 INT%, 96.9 QB rating, 13 4th quarter comebacks, 14 GW drives, 118 Rate+

    Eli: 119 GS, 69-50 (58%), 58.4 completion %, 27579 yards, 185 TDs, 4.7 TD%, 129 INT, 3.3 INT%, 82.1 QB rating, 20 4th quarter comebacks, 24 GW drives, 99 Rate+ (and 100 is average)

    Eli has had a longer career, so he's accumulated more yards and TDs, but Romo has been way more efficient as a QB throughout their careers
    Statistically yeah sure, but Eli has gotten them two rings and don't bring up the "Oh it's the team that wins".

    Eli was two huge reasons they won, and Romo is a huge reason they haven't so that argument doesn't work here.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    27,447
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by krisxsong View Post
    Statistically yeah sure, but Eli has gotten them two rings and don't bring up the "Oh it's the team that wins".

    Eli was two huge reasons they won, and Romo is a huge reason they haven't so that argument doesn't work here.
    He was a slight step above a game manager the first Super Bowl run and don't bring up that the team wins?? But that is who wins. Romo's stastical body of work completely trumps Eli top to bottom and it isn't really even close, which is why it's ridiculous that Giants fans make it a foregone conclusion that Eli is worlds better than Romo, when Romo has shown he's better. In Eli's career he's had 4 pretty good playoff games with two other good one (San Fran but he was getting shut down completely at the end of the game and he didn't win that game for them, an it was a similar story with GB in 07, where he played well but didn't really win the game for the Giants) and two games where he just sat and managed (Dallas and Tampa), and then 3 terrible games in his other 3 playoff losses. So I think Eli has played 11 playoff games if I recall correctly, and I never knew 11 games, of which only 4 were somewhat dominant performances by Eli, trumps his bad playoff games and slightly above average career in his 119 regular season starts, and his career Rate+ actually has him at below average


    Soon...

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by krisxsong View Post
    Statistically yeah sure, but Eli has gotten them two rings and don't bring up the "Oh it's the team that wins".

    Eli was two huge reasons they won, and Romo is a huge reason they haven't so that argument doesn't work here.
    Don't bring up facts that disprove your point? must be nice to have an arguement where you can just say ignore certian facts..............


    yoiu keep bringing up rings, that willg e tthrown in your face because it is 100% undeniably true. teams, not individuals win championships. having a ring does not suddenly make you better than someone else
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,753
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    He was a slight step above a game manager the first Super Bowl run and don't bring up that the team wins?? But that is who wins. Romo's stastical body of work completely trumps Eli top to bottom and it isn't really even close, which is why it's ridiculous that Giants fans make it a foregone conclusion that Eli is worlds better than Romo, when Romo has shown he's better. In Eli's career he's had 4 pretty good playoff games with two other good one (San Fran but he was getting shut down completely at the end of the game and he didn't win that game for them, an it was a similar story with GB in 07, where he played well but didn't really win the game for the Giants) and two games where he just sat and managed (Dallas and Tampa), and then 3 terrible games in his other 3 playoff losses. So I think Eli has played 11 playoff games if I recall correctly, and I never knew 11 games, of which only 4 were somewhat dominant performances by Eli, trumps his bad playoff games and slightly above average career in his 119 regular season starts, and his career Rate+ actually has him at below average
    Top to bottom eh? So I guess his 80.8 playoff QB Rating trumps Eli's 89.3 playoff QB Rating right

    The problem with looking at the entire careers worth of stats is that when Tony Romo first got his shot he played well, really well. Eli Manning had a much tougher job being a #1 overall pick and having to start his rookie year.

    Eli struggled, for the first 4 years he was a mediocre QB at best. The difference between them is that while Tony Romo hasn't improved his game a whole lot Eli has improved by leaps and bounds. Eli really came into his own in the Giants' first Superbowl run and the numbers reflect that, here are his ratings for the first 4 years vs the last 4:

    54.7%; 4.3 TD%; 3.5 INT%; 6.3 Y/A; 73.4 QB rating
    61.6%; 5.1 TD%; 3.1 INT%; 7.7 Y/A; 89.5 QB rating

    That is an insane improvement from his first 4 years to his last 4. So the Eli of the last 4 years has played incredibly well.


    His QB Rating goes up to a 90.2 when you include the playoff stats from his Superbowl run until now. That is when he turned the corner. And since then he has played like a great QB.

    But the reason I referenced the playoff QB Ratings above is to make a key point, during the playoffs Eli plays as good or better than the regular season; whereas Tony Romo plays way worse. You'd be hard pressed to find a player whose QB Rating plummets so completely as Romo's from the regular season to the playoffs. It goes from 96.9 to 80.8. That is a 16.1 drop!

    In terms of legacy if both were to retire right now the difference is nobody would remember Tony Romo, he would be a footnote in even Cowboys QB play, let alone NFL play. Eli Manning will be debated for the HOF (fairly or not) and widely remembered for a long time.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,753
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    Don't bring up facts that disprove your point? must be nice to have an arguement where you can just say ignore certian facts..............


    yoiu keep bringing up rings, that willg e tthrown in your face because it is 100% undeniably true. teams, not individuals win championships. having a ring does not suddenly make you better than someone else
    So the fact that he has a 96.1 QB Rating in Superbowls including 2 Game Winning Drives means nothing to you?

    When will you finally understand, it's not that he has 2 rings, it's that he played really well during the games and made 2 game winning drives. He literally outplayed Tom Brady in both Superbowls, that is quite an accomplishment.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    27,447
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    Don't bring up facts that disprove your point? must be nice to have an arguement where you can just say ignore certian facts..............


    yoiu keep bringing up rings, that willg e tthrown in your face because it is 100% undeniably true. teams, not individuals win championships. having a ring does not suddenly make you better than someone else
    So the fact that he has a 96.1 QB Rating in Superbowls including 2 Game Winning Drives means nothing to you?

    When will you finally understand, it's not that he has 2 rings, it's that he played really well during the games and made 2 game winning drives. He literally outplayed Tom Brady in both Superbowls, that is quite an accomplishment.
    I get it, 2 games completely makes everyone forget about an entire set of 100+ games before that. Alex Smiths playoff QB rating is 101...in the 2 biggest games he's played his rating is 101 and he outdueled Drew Brees. He's great now too, right, and we should forget about everything when evaluating his career because of 2 games in the postseason here he didn't throw any INTs...


    Soon...

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,753
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    I get it, 2 games completely makes everyone forget about an entire set of 100+ games before that. Alex Smiths playoff QB rating is 101...in the 2 biggest games he's played his rating is 101 and he outdueled Drew Brees. He's great now too, right, and we should forget about everything when evaluating his career because of 2 games in the postseason here he didn't throw any INTs...
    My friend, you don't get it at all.

    It's not that those 2 games trump everything, it's that those are an extra bullet we can add to Eli's resume that Romo can't. Eli has played well in Superbowls, he has played well in the playoffs in general. He has played well the last 4 years in the regular season as well.

    Romo has played well in the regular season... that's it. That is all he has.

    And as to the Alex Smith part, you seem to have the inability to realize that players get better over time. And in Alex's case (though I won't get too far into it because this isn't the thread), there were a number of mitigating factors that played a part in his numbers.

    Here again I will show the numbers of his first 3 years vs the last 3 years:

    54.5%; 2.4 TD%; 3.9 INT%; 5.8 Y/A; 63.5 QB Rating
    60.6%; 4.2 TD%; 2.3 INT%; 6.8 Y/A; 85.2 QB Rating

    Also consider his QB Rating has improved the last 4 years straight:

    57.2 (injury plagued year, year before when healthy & an OC he had a 74.8)
    81.5
    82.1
    90.7

    See how he has improved? See generally how who that Quarterback is today isn't who he was in year 1? That is the same thing for Eli Manning.

    He has improved tremendously and the last 4 years has good regular season, playoff, and Superbowl play. The trifecta. Romo has 1 of 3...

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    So the fact that he has a 96.1 QB Rating in Superbowls including 2 Game Winning Drives means nothing to you?

    When will you finally understand, it's not that he has 2 rings, it's that he played really well during the games and made 2 game winning drives. He literally outplayed Tom Brady in both Superbowls, that is quite an accomplishment.
    i'd like to introduce you to my good friend mr. sample size.



    no 2 game smeans very little in the span of an entire career. him playing well in the superbowl doesn't change the fact that you win as a team


    jim plunkett has the 3rd highest qb rating in a superbowl ever. ben rothlisberger had a 22.6 and won, while jake delhomme had a 113.6 and lost. teams win titles, not indivkduals
    Last edited by Pinstripe pride; 02-08-2012 at 02:01 PM.
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Jersey
    Posts
    3,317
    vCash
    1500
    If Peyton had Eli's supporting cast he would have won 4 SB's by now.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    27,447
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    My friend, you don't get it at all.

    It's not that those 2 games trump everything, it's that those are an extra bullet we can add to Eli's resume that Romo can't. Eli has played well in Superbowls, he has played well in the playoffs in general. He has played well the last 4 years in the regular season as well.

    Romo has played well in the regular season... that's it. That is all he has.

    And as to the Alex Smith part, you seem to have the inability to realize that players get better over time. And in Alex's case (though I won't get too far into it because this isn't the thread), there were a number of mitigating factors that played a part in his numbers.

    Here again I will show the numbers of his first 3 years vs the last 3 years:

    54.5%; 2.4 TD%; 3.9 INT%; 5.8 Y/A; 63.5 QB Rating
    60.6%; 4.2 TD%; 2.3 INT%; 6.8 Y/A; 85.2 QB Rating

    Also consider his QB Rating has improved the last 4 years straight:

    57.2 (injury plagued year, year before when healthy & an OC he had a 74.8)
    81.5
    82.1
    90.7

    See how he has improved? See generally how who that Quarterback is today isn't who he was in year 1? That is the same thing for Eli Manning.

    He has improved tremendously and the last 4 years has good regular season, playoff, and Superbowl play. The trifecta. Romo has 1 of 3...
    He has improved, yes, but because of that we get to discredit his entire career of borderline mediocrity when comparing him to Romo all time?? Especially when Romo STILL had a better year?!?! I mean ****, if playoffs meant everything, David Freese should be the highest paid player in the MLB, right? Because he basically won them the WS! I understand that playoff games and Super Bowl games hold some weight when comparing 2 players, but the sample size is miniscule compared to entire careers, and with Eli, and with any QB really, you can't bank on continued progression, because for all we know, this year could be an anomaly and he regresses back to what he was pre-2011, a borderline top 10 QB, so "oh, he's improving, so he's elite now" doesn't prove anything. so 1 great year, 1 pretty good year, and the rest average with 4 great playoff games, 3 putrid ones, 2 good ones, and 2 games where he just managed the game is better than about 5 seasons-worth of great production out of Romo (he's played 6, but came on in the middle of 06 and missed a bunch of '10)?? This was also Romo's best year, and he can still progress as well, so I just don't get why he's better than Romo when Romo has outperformed Eli every year of Romo's career (from 06 and on so we're not even talking about Eli's first 2 seasons) where Romo hasn't posted a QB rating under 91 and Eli has only done that twice, without finishing a season with a QB rating above 100 like Romo did this year?? The stats blow Eli out of the water, so Eli closes the gap on postseason performance, but it doesn't overtake him, or Rivers, or Roethlisberger.


    Soon...

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    24,927
    vCash
    1500
    Please don't insult our intelligence with ****** topics like this.
    Career-wise and skillwise Peyton completely buries Eli. Its not even remotely close.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,419
    vCash
    1000
    Quote Originally Posted by cambovenzi View Post
    Please don't insult our intelligence with ****** topics like this.
    Career-wise and skillwise Peyton completely buries Eli. Its not even remotely close.
    This x1000.

    Eli has gotten better but anyone who thinks he will ever be as good as his brother is trippin hard.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,753
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    He has improved, yes, but because of that we get to discredit his entire career of borderline mediocrity when comparing him to Romo all time?? Especially when Romo STILL had a better year?!?! I mean ****, if playoffs meant everything, David Freese should be the highest paid player in the MLB, right? Because he basically won them the WS! I understand that playoff games and Super Bowl games hold some weight when comparing 2 players, but the sample size is miniscule compared to entire careers, and with Eli, and with any QB really, you can't bank on continued progression, because for all we know, this year could be an anomaly and he regresses back to what he was pre-2011, a borderline top 10 QB, so "oh, he's improving, so he's elite now" doesn't prove anything. so 1 great year, 1 pretty good year, and the rest average with 4 great playoff games, 3 putrid ones, 2 good ones, and 2 games where he just managed the game is better than about 5 seasons-worth of great production out of Romo (he's played 6, but came on in the middle of 06 and missed a bunch of '10)?? This was also Romo's best year, and he can still progress as well, so I just don't get why he's better than Romo when Romo has outperformed Eli every year of Romo's career (from 06 and on so we're not even talking about Eli's first 2 seasons) where Romo hasn't posted a QB rating under 91 and Eli has only done that twice, without finishing a season with a QB rating above 100 like Romo did this year?? The stats blow Eli out of the water, so Eli closes the gap on postseason performance, but it doesn't overtake him, or Rivers, or Roethlisberger.
    The last 4 years the stats (including playoffs) are 95 to 90. That is not "blow out of the water" territory.

    If that is, I shutter to think of what Eli's 89 playoff rating vs. Tony's 80 would be classified as...

    And you keep focusing on stats as if they are the only thing that matters. We are never going to agree because you look at stats like they are the end all be all, they are a helpful way to narrow the field, but they are by no means an end-all be-all.

    A 91 QB Rating doesn't make you better than a 90 QB Rating. To imply that stats are so accurate that a miniscule difference is in any way definitive is laughable.

    If stats are that accurate and precise, what does that say about Tony Romo's playoff rating?

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    27,447
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    He has improved, yes, but because of that we get to discredit his entire career of borderline mediocrity when comparing him to Romo all time?? Especially when Romo STILL had a better year?!?! I mean ****, if playoffs meant everything, David Freese should be the highest paid player in the MLB, right? Because he basically won them the WS! I understand that playoff games and Super Bowl games hold some weight when comparing 2 players, but the sample size is miniscule compared to entire careers, and with Eli, and with any QB really, you can't bank on continued progression, because for all we know, this year could be an anomaly and he regresses back to what he was pre-2011, a borderline top 10 QB, so "oh, he's improving, so he's elite now" doesn't prove anything. so 1 great year, 1 pretty good year, and the rest average with 4 great playoff games, 3 putrid ones, 2 good ones, and 2 games where he just managed the game is better than about 5 seasons-worth of great production out of Romo (he's played 6, but came on in the middle of 06 and missed a bunch of '10)?? This was also Romo's best year, and he can still progress as well, so I just don't get why he's better than Romo when Romo has outperformed Eli every year of Romo's career (from 06 and on so we're not even talking about Eli's first 2 seasons) where Romo hasn't posted a QB rating under 91 and Eli has only done that twice, without finishing a season with a QB rating above 100 like Romo did this year?? The stats blow Eli out of the water, so Eli closes the gap on postseason performance, but it doesn't overtake him, or Rivers, or Roethlisberger.
    The last 4 years the stats (including playoffs) are 95 to 90. That is not "blow out of the water" territory.

    If that is, I shutter to think of what Eli's 89 playoff rating vs. Tony's 80 would be classified as...

    And you keep focusing on stats as if they are the only thing that matters. We are never going to agree because you look at stats like they are the end all be all, they are a helpful way to narrow the field, but they are by no means an end-all be-all.

    A 91 QB Rating doesn't make you better than a 90 QB Rating. To imply that stats are so accurate that a miniscule difference is in any way definitive is laughable.

    If stats are that accurate and precise, what does that say about Tony Romo's playoff rating?
    Sample. Size. Which is also another interesting thing because of Eli's 4th quarters, because that shows he plays slightly above average during the majority of the game, but ZOMG one drive and he automatically is elite! Tebowmania has nothing o this, ****

    Alex Smith has a QB rating of over 100 in the postseason so he must be elite, correct??

    Stats aren't everything but they hold a lot of weight because it's one of the only concrete things we have to look at. And Romo's total career blows Eli out of the water, and even if you look at the past 4 seasons Romo still beats Eli by a good amount and beats him pretty well in Rate+, which is a more accurate stat than QB rating. So Eli has 11 better games than Romo (not even but well say 11 just for Eli's entire postseason career) and the accumulation of almost 80 games Romo stomps Eli, so what do you want to hold more weight for? And it's not like it's a one point difference either, and Romo has better TD/INT ratio and on top of that is more mobile than Eli.


    Soon...

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,753
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mdlr52192 View Post
    Sample. Size. Which is also another interesting thing because of Eli's 4th quarters, because that shows he plays slightly above average during the majority of the game, but ZOMG one drive and he automatically is elite! Tebowmania has nothing o this, ****

    Alex Smith has a QB rating of over 100 in the postseason so he must be elite, correct??

    Stats aren't everything but they hold a lot of weight because it's one of the only concrete things we have to look at. And Romo's total career blows Eli out of the water, and even if you look at the past 4 seasons Romo still beats Eli by a good amount and beats him pretty well in Rate+, which is a more accurate stat than QB rating. So Eli has 11 better games than Romo (not even but well say 11 just for Eli's entire postseason career) and the accumulation of almost 80 games Romo stomps Eli, so what do you want to hold more weight for? And it's not like it's a one point difference either, and Romo has better TD/INT ratio and on top of that is more mobile than Eli.
    If that one play wins the game and the quarterback does that consistently why can't he be considered a good/great QB? I don't understand what your fascination with downplaying excellent performance in the 4th.

    I mean, you keep saying "good QBs don't need to win in the 4th", somebody should've told that to Montana (the catch, drive to win SB), Monday night vs Elway, and Brady (3 GW FG drives, last minute TD drive vs Giants in 07).

    BY my recolleciton, Joe Montana was called "Joe Cool" and "Comeback Kid" for his ability to come from behind and win a game in the 4th.

    Dan Marino has the most 4th quarter comebacks ever. Brady has never won a Superbowl without a game winning FG drive.

    Should we marginalize all of them because of "ZOMG one drive "?

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •