Eli or Ben

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

matt moore had two of the highest QBR posted last year in individual games................

Yeah and Brody Croyle finished in the top 5 in the traditional Qb rating one season.

They are both a decent basic metric to look at things, but both are very flawed and shouldn't be used to rate Qbs.

In fact...if you are going to use stats to rank Qbs...I'd almost rather look at team stats. In a lot of ways, they tell a better story of the truth.

[bosox3431]

Yeah and Brody Croyle finished in the top 5 in the traditional Qb rating one season.

They are both a decent basic metric to look at things, but both are very flawed and shouldn't be used to rate Qbs.

In fact...if you are going to use stats to rank Qbs...I'd almost rather look at team stats. In a lot of ways, they tell a better story of the truth.

Team stats are the best way to judge individual players? the logic keeps getting better and better.

[valade16]

matt moore had two of the highest QBR posted last year in individual games................

... and posted two of the Highest QB ratings posted for all of last year (147.5; 133.3; and 122.3) in individual games.

Does that now call into question the accuracy of QB Rating for you? NO? Then why does it call into question the accuracy of QBR?

I also find it funny that you've spent about 30 posts preaching about sample size yet are willing to broad-stroke criticize QBR based on 2 games. I guess you only heed your own advice when it goes against Eli

And as for the Matt Ryan stuff, do you consider Matt Ryan average?

[Pinstripe power]

Yeah and Brody Croyle finished in the top 5 in the traditional Qb rating one season.

They are both a decent basic metric to look at things, but both are very flawed and shouldn't be used to rate Qbs.

In fact...if you are going to use stats to rank Qbs...I'd almost rather look at team stats. In a lot of ways, they tell a better story of the truth.

touche

[Pinstripe power]

... and posted two of the Highest QB ratings posted for all of last year (147.5; 133.3; and 122.3) in individual games.

Does that now call into question the accuracy of QB Rating for you? NO? Then why does it call into question the accuracy of QBR?

I also find it funny that you've spent about 30 posts preaching about sample size yet are willing to broad-stroke criticize QBR based on 2 games. I guess you only heed your own advice when it goes against Eli

And as for the Matt Ryan stuff, do you consider Matt Ryan average?

im not calling it in to question. it is more contigent on team success than regular qb rating. im not syaing its wrong, i just personally dont like it.


he's outside my top 10, which is average for me, so yes.

[valade16]

Team stats are the best way to judge individual players? the logic keeps getting better and better.

Compared to your logic any logic whatsoever can be labelled better and better.

I mean, you keep acting like the team has no bearing on individual stats. It's really quite comical to watch you contradict yourself considering every single Peyton vs Brady thread you make it a point to bring up how good Brady's numbers looked with elite talent like Peyton.

Yet when it comes to Eli suddenly it's individual stats are solely accumulated by that person and the team has no bearing on them whatsoever.

But no, question our logic

[bosox3431]

Compared to your logic any logic whatsoever can be labelled better and better.

I mean, you keep acting like the team has no bearing on individual stats. It's really quite comical to watch you contradict yourself considering every single Peyton vs Brady thread you make it a point to bring up how good Brady's numbers looked with elite talent like Peyton.

Yet when it comes to Eli suddenly it's individual stats are solely accumulated by that person and the team has no bearing on them whatsoever.

But no, question our logic

When did I say the team don't? And I don't know what your talking about the pm vs TB thread. Considering I'm not a patriots fan and side with Manning. Nice try though. And if team does affect individual stats, like they do, how does that help Eli's case. Considering he has one of the best wrs and another on the verge of being top 10. Way to help your arguemnt.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

Team stats are the best way to judge individual players? the logic keeps getting better and better.

In many ways yes.

Lets just look at Eli vs. Romo.

Eli led his team to have a higher ranked passing offense (yards).

Eli also led his team to more offensive TDs on the season and more offensive points overall. The Giants had about 17 rushing TDs (or something like that). Only about 3 or 4 of them were set up by the rushing offense. Eli was basically responsible for setting up the rest. Meanwhile, the Cowboys only had 4 rushing TDs despite having a clearly better rushing offense. So, while Romo threw 2 more passing TDs...Eli led his team to almost 10 more total TDs on the season.

In fact, the Cowboys had more rushing yards and more yards per carry.

So inconclusion......

Giants passing offense > Cowboys passing offense

Cowboys rushing offense > Giants rushing offense

Giants total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards) > Cowboys total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards)

It seems to me that Eli had a more positive effect on his offense than did Tony Romo.

Qb rating only tells us about yards, passing TDs, Ints, completions, and completion percentage. Those stats alone don't paint a clear enough picture.

Eli had a lower completion percentage, but at the end of the day he had more yards and more yards per attempt. That tells me that he was better at moving the ball in between the 20s.

And if you look at their red zone play...Eli may have thrown 2 less TDs, but he led his team and set up his team for more total TDs and more total points. Advantage Eli.

The only thing Romo was better at than Eli was interceptions. Having said that, Eli did a tremendous job this season of taking calculated risks. Despite the face that Eli threw 6 more picks, he and Romo had about the same amount of truly detrimental Ints. When its 3rd and long at mid field...an Int has basically the same effect on your team's chances of winning as does an incomplete pass. If you go back and do the research, Eli only had about 4-5 Ints that were inexcusable and costly to the team. Off the top of my head, I can count about 3-4 ints that Romo had that were truly detrimental to his team's chances of winning a given game.

Still though...ok I'll give Romo the win in the TO department. But, this past year there was no question that Eli lead his offense to be more successful than did Romo in the grand scheme of things, despite the fact that he had less balance in his offense.

Team stats told this story. The individual stats in this particular case...hid a good portion of the truth.

Now, if you simply watch the games you can see this with your own two eyes, but team stats cannot be ignored. They are just as, if not even more important than the individual stats when it pertains to evaluating the Qb position.

In the end, you have to look at ALL of these statistics in context to what happens in the game and throughout the season. You also have to look at the qualities these guys possess off the field and in certain big stage moments.

Eli was better than Romo last season, despite have a lower Qb rating by about 7 points or so. Eli was a better and more valuable asset to his team this past season.

[JayStar-8]

In many ways yes.

Lets just look at Eli vs. Romo.

Eli led his team to have a higher ranked passing offense (yards).

Eli also led his team to more offensive TDs on the season and more offensive points overall. The Giants had about 17 rushing TDs (or something like that). Only about 3 or 4 of them were set up by the rushing offense. Eli was basically responsible for setting up the rest. Meanwhile, the Cowboys only had 4 rushing TDs despite having a clearly better rushing offense. So, while Romo threw 2 more passing TDs...Eli led his team to almost 10 more total TDs on the season.

In fact, the Cowboys had more rushing yards and more yards per carry.

So inconclusion......

Giants passing offense > Cowboys passing offense

Cowboys rushing offense > Giants rushing offense

Giants total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards) > Cowboys total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards)

It seems to me that Eli had a more positive effect on his offense than did Tony Romo.

Qb rating only tells us about yards, passing TDs, Ints, completions, and completion percentage. Those stats alone don't paint a clear enough picture.

Eli had a lower completion percentage, but at the end of the day he had more yards and more yards per attempt. That tells me that he was better at moving the ball in between the 20s.

And if you look at their red zone play...Eli may have thrown 2 less TDs, but he led his team and set up his team for more total TDs and more total points. Advantage Eli.

The only thing Romo was better at than Eli was interceptions. Having said that, Eli did a tremendous job this season of taking calculated risks. Despite the face that Eli threw 6 more picks, he and Romo had about the same amount of truly detrimental Ints. When its 3rd and long at mid field...an Int has basically the same effect on your team's chances of winning as does an incomplete pass. If you go back and do the research, Eli only had about 4-5 Ints that were inexcusable and costly to the team. Off the top of my head, I can count about 3-4 ints that Romo had that were truly detrimental to his team's chances of winning a given game.

Still though...ok I'll give Romo the win in the TO department. But, this past year there was no question that Eli lead his offense to be more successful than did Romo in the grand scheme of things, despite the fact that he had less balance in his offense.

Team stats told this story. The individual stats in this particular case...hid a good portion of the truth.

Now, if you simply watch the games you can see this with your own two eyes, but team stats cannot be ignored. They are just as, if not even more important than the individual stats when it pertains to evaluating the Qb position.

In the end, you have to look at ALL of these statistics in context to what happens in the game and throughout the season. You also have to look at the qualities these guys possess off the field and in certain big stage moments.

Eli was better than Romo last season, despite have a lower Qb rating by about 7 points or so. He was a better and more valuable asset to his team this past season.

wow, I just wrote a post about this concept in the other thread.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

wow, I just wrote a post about this concept in the other thread.

Yeah I know...I just read it.

Mine was better though.

[JayStar-8]

Yeah I know...I just read it.

Mine was better though.

eh, I just brought up an example.... didn't really feel like making a long *** post talking about all of the aspects.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

eh, I just brought up an example.... didn't really feel like making a long *** post talking about all of the aspects.

Well, I wanted to paint as clear a picture as possible for our mutual friend.

[krisxsong]

im not calling it in to question. it is more contigent on team success than regular qb rating. im not syaing its wrong, i just personally dont like it.


he's outside my top 10, which is average for me, so yes.

I believe this where we have our massive disconnect.

There are 32 teams. That means the average mark should logically be at 16, however just because a QB is ranked 16th doesn't mean he is an average QB.

Example? What if there were 15 players that put up Drew Brees type numbers? Are you gonna say the guy you have at 15 is average because he's out of your top 10?

Matt Ryan is not in my top 10 either but that does not mean he is average. 4177 Yards, 62%, 28 TD, 12 INT is not average not matter which way you slice it.

He might be average in the mathematical sense that he's right in the middle of the pack but that doesn't mean he's average in terms of being ordinary, typical, normal.

[bosox3431]

In many ways yes.

Lets just look at Eli vs. Romo.

Eli led his team to have a higher ranked passing offense (yards).

Eli also led his team to more offensive TDs on the season and more offensive points overall. The Giants had about 17 rushing TDs (or something like that). Only about 3 or 4 of them were set up by the rushing offense. Eli was basically responsible for setting up the rest. Meanwhile, the Cowboys only had 4 rushing TDs despite having a clearly better rushing offense. So, while Romo threw 2 more passing TDs...Eli led his team to almost 10 more total TDs on the season.

In fact, the Cowboys had more rushing yards and more yards per carry.

So inconclusion......

Giants passing offense > Cowboys passing offense

Cowboys rushing offense > Giants rushing offense

Giants total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards) > Cowboys total offense (TDs, Points, and Yards)

It seems to me that Eli had a more positive effect on his offense than did Tony Romo.

Qb rating only tells us about yards, passing TDs, Ints, completions, and completion percentage. Those stats alone don't paint a clear enough picture.

Eli had a lower completion percentage, but at the end of the day he had more yards and more yards per attempt. That tells me that he was better at moving the ball in between the 20s.

And if you look at their red zone play...Eli may have thrown 2 less TDs, but he led his team and set up his team for more total TDs and more total points. Advantage Eli.

The only thing Romo was better at than Eli was interceptions. Having said that, Eli did a tremendous job this season of taking calculated risks. Despite the face that Eli threw 6 more picks, he and Romo had about the same amount of truly detrimental Ints. When its 3rd and long at mid field...an Int has basically the same effect on your team's chances of winning as does an incomplete pass. If you go back and do the research, Eli only had about 4-5 Ints that were inexcusable and costly to the team. Off the top of my head, I can count about 3-4 ints that Romo had that were truly detrimental to his team's chances of winning a given game.

Still though...ok I'll give Romo the win in the TO department. But, this past year there was no question that Eli lead his offense to be more successful than did Romo in the grand scheme of things, despite the fact that he had less balance in his offense.

Team stats told this story. The individual stats in this particular case...hid a good portion of the truth.

Now, if you simply watch the games you can see this with your own two eyes, but team stats cannot be ignored. They are just as, if not even more important than the individual stats when it pertains to evaluating the Qb position.

In the end, you have to look at ALL of these statistics in context to what happens in the game and throughout the season. You also have to look at the qualities these guys possess off the field and in certain big stage moments.

Eli was better than Romo last season, despite have a lower Qb rating by about 7 points or so. Eli was a better and more valuable asset to his team this past season.

Or how about this. The giants.longest rush att was 37 yds. That's tells me most of their rush tds were in the redzone. So maybe they don't trust Eli in the red zone
Prolly afraid his interceptionitis will show up again.

In fact all 17 came in the red zone. 15 pass in the red zone. With Manning's 50% comp and 75.9 rate in the red zone, I could see why they would run in the red zone.

[Wrigheyes4MVP]

Or how about this. The giants.longest rush att was 37 yds. That's tells me most of their rush tds were in the redzone. So maybe they don't trust Eli in the red zone
Prolly afraid his interceptionitis will show up again.

In fact all 17 came in the red zone. 15 pass in the red zone. With Manning's 50% comp and 75.9 rate in the red zone, I could see why they would run in the red zone.

More bologna