Without a ring and with how many playoff wins, ranked 5th, Ben and Eli with 2 rings and how many playoff wins ranked 9th and 10th. I just give up on all this crap, I just want Eli to get us 1 more, if he can do that, then there are only 2 QB's in the game that have ever won more, Bradshaw and Montana, then they can say whatever they want to say.
Matt Ryan is not even close to Eli and Ben, and I can't stand Ben, but you have to be fair, and sorry about the above post, I did forget Tom Brady to go along with Bradshaw and Montana.
is clutch. He doesn't thrive under constant pressure of no protection--neither would Brady. But give him time and he will not throw a lot of INTs and he will not miss wide open WRs.
We have been (slowly) fortifying the line for him and I think we will see another window of 2 SB possibilities in Eli's remaining 5 years or so. Utilizing Cruz and Beckham.
1. Brady
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
Matt Ryan is so good? He was absoltuely dreadful to end of the year last year, and laid a massive shit in a game where if they won - they would have made the playoffs.
Now I am not saying he is awful. But I would take Ben, Eli, Wilson, and possibly Stafford over him. And would think hard about Tannenhill too.
1. Brady
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
I have Luck passing Brees right now. He's just too good and never had anything close to a Jimmy Graham, still doesn't.
Anyone who ranks him above Eli and Big Ben is a moron. Romo any better than either. Funny how Dallas did the best it's done in years when they upgraded their OL and relied up the run more
Than they have since Emett Smith was there.
IMO both Romo and Ryan are ESPN creations who get propped up by the football loudmouths. Ryan also looks great to the fantasy crowd since he has had some pro bowl type receivers his whole career. Matthew Stafford in this crowd too. Guys who haven't won shit but hey they put up fantasy stats so HOF here we come.
and somewhat underrates 2014-2015 Luck. Eli, hard to tell. 10th is about right based on his recent body of work. He should look a lot better with a rebuilt O-line and a full year in this new offense under his belt. Looking forward to having more reason for "Is Eli elite?" conversations. Little reason for that since the last Super Bowl season.
Without a ring and with how many playoff wins, ranked 5th, Ben and Eli with 2 rings and how many playoff wins ranked 9th and 10th. I just give up on all this crap, I just want Eli to get us 1 more, if he can do that, then there are only 2 QB's in the game that have ever won more, Bradshaw and Montana, then they can say whatever they want to say.
1. Brady
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
I have Luck passing Brees right now. He's just too good and never had anything close to a Jimmy Graham, still doesn't.
Not so fast.
I want to see him play a decent game against the Patriots first. Here's a guy who beat the 49ers and Seahawks two years ago and makes the Patriots look like '85 Bears every damn time.
Luck is a good QB but does benefit greatly from positive media and fan bias. He might have thrown the most playoff INTs of all QBs the last 2-3 seasons.
He should be ranked high. The guy has thrown for a bunch of yards a bunch of tds won a bunch of playoff games and 2 rings. He's been involved in some of the greatest plays in recent history. Ben can play for my team any time but you do have to wonder about some of the off the field stuff. His on the field performance the last 11 years has been terrific save for one or two injuries.
Giants fans like to get on rivers and Ben because they were in the same Eli draft so there were too many annoying comparisons early on. I get it but now that Eli has earned his accolades I feel like it's easy to appreciate the talents of rivers and Ben. Both guys can play.
He has had some of the best offensive weapons any QB could have throughout his career and has done nothing great with it. Yet, every year we have to hear about "Matty Ice" and how great he is. I just don't get it.
At any given point throughout his career he has had one of the greatest TE's in the history of the game, a great stable of RB's and possibly the best WR tandem in the NFL and every year what has he done with it?
This is a fantasy rankings of the quarterbacks. And in fantasy, Romo is an excellent option at QB. Ryan gets a boost because Julio Jones is a top 10 fantasy WR, and until the last year or two, Roddy White was considered a valuable fantasy player as well (now he's 36). Still, compare that to Beckham (#4) and Cruz (#50) and you can see why Ryan gets the love.
Consider that in a 10-team league, Eli is (in theory) the last starting QB taken and thus, a starting fantasy QB. Now I don't know about you, but in the leagues I've played in, Eli is usually a backup on most teams. I'm usually trying to grab him as my backup.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
Romo has consistently never won a Super Bowl. Agreed.
You can keep your consistency and I'll take the guy who can play the game with ice in his veins, balls to the wall when it is all on the line. And come out on top.
And stats are for losers. I hope Romo's QBR keeps you warm at night. Call me when he throws two 4th quarter TDs to win a Super Bowl
Stats are used to compile top ten lists like the one being discussed. If it wasn't about stats and production, and just about championships Manning and Roethlisberger would be ranked much higher. But they are not, so it has to be about something else.
I am very comfortable with Romo this year because I know he will produce another great year. It's up to the rest of the team to produce at his level.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
He was also 23rd in attempts, which was the fewest among any QB with 14 or more starts. To me that tells me if he doesnt tneed to throw it, then isnt as valuable as one thinks.
Compared to Murray, who rushed the ball 80 times more than the next highest carrier. Plus his 57 catches. That shows me that Murray, not Romo, was their MVP and not even particular close either. They depended on Murray far more than Romo. It could even be argued that Bryant and a few of their OL were more valuable than Romo.
Dont look at just stats. I have no problems saying Romo was good last year, but I do have a problem with peopel saying he was the MVP of the team or best player on the team. He went along for the ride.
I am very comfortable with Romo this year because I know he will produce another great year. It's up to the rest of the team to produce at his level.
I think the OL, Murray, and Dez were just fine last year. But, hey... lets be happy their season didnt end with a Romo interception like it usually does.
RE: RE: Romo was the equal of MVP Rodgers last year
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
He was also 23rd in attempts, which was the fewest among any QB with 14 or more starts. To me that tells me if he doesnt tneed to throw it, then isnt as valuable as one thinks.
Compared to Murray, who rushed the ball 80 times more than the next highest carrier. Plus his 57 catches. That shows me that Murray, not Romo, was their MVP and not even particular close either. They depended on Murray far more than Romo. It could even be argued that Bryant and a few of their OL were more valuable than Romo.
Dont look at just stats. I have no problems saying Romo was good last year, but I do have a problem with peopel saying he was the MVP of the team or best player on the team. He went along for the ride.
The answer to your MVP question is the Arizona game.
With Romo out, Arizona concentrated on stopping the run. Dallas was held to a season low in rushing yards. Arizona challenged Weeden, and Weeden couldn't make the plays in the passing game to make Arizona pay. Had Romo been available, Arizona would not have crowded the LOS. If Arizona had crowded the LOS, Romo would have made them pay.
Teams couldn't stack the LOS to stop Murray because of Romo. If teams chose to stop Murray, Romo would have a field day passing.
Now that Murray is gone, the true MVP of Dallas will be revealed. It will be revealed that Romo is the MVP of Dallas.
I am so glad we switched systems and coordinators. I am hoping all goes well and Eli can have a 32-40 TD year with like 10 INTs. That would be amazing. Get all these people who are used to Eli in the old system to see what he can do in a new system.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
Romo's 3rd and 22 conversion in Seattle this year was huge.
If that was a playoff game, it would be historic.
Some will argue about the Dez Bryant non TD being a TD in this year's playoffs.
You'll get your Wilson wish in a year or two probably. There were games this year that the Seahawks struggled just because they didn't have their best defensive players (Bobby Wagner, Brandon Mebane) in a few games.
I used to understand the position Ryan is ranked in these things.
Young, great numbers, shiny new toy, but the guy has been in the league for too long and has won NOTHING, and has come up small in big spots to be put in the Top 10.
If either Ryan, Stafford or Dalton ever got to Conference championship game even I could listen to an argument, but with the lack of playoff success none of them should sniff the top 10.
Gidiefor! Saddle my horse and charge my pistols! I ride for Tysons Corner tonight!
We have been (slowly) fortifying the line for him and I think we will see another window of 2 SB possibilities in Eli's remaining 5 years or so. Utilizing Cruz and Beckham.
Gidiefor! Saddle my horse and charge my pistols! I ride for Tysons Corner tonight!
Yes my lord and master -- immediately!
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
Quote:
Some jabroni from USA Today only ranked Eli as the tenth best QB in the league?
Gidiefor! Saddle my horse and charge my pistols! I ride for Tysons Corner tonight!
Yes my lord and master -- immediately!
Good man. Keep an eye on the household staff while I'm gone.
Quote:
In comment 12290036 Klaatu said:
Quote:
Some jabroni from USA Today only ranked Eli as the tenth best QB in the league?
Gidiefor! Saddle my horse and charge my pistols! I ride for Tysons Corner tonight!
Yes my lord and master -- immediately!
Good man. Keep an eye on the household staff while I'm gone.
{i]Klaatu for Emperor !!! [/i]
Now I am not saying he is awful. But I would take Ben, Eli, Wilson, and possibly Stafford over him. And would think hard about Tannenhill too.
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
I have Luck passing Brees right now. He's just too good and never had anything close to a Jimmy Graham, still doesn't.
Than they have since Emett Smith was there.
IMO both Romo and Ryan are ESPN creations who get propped up by the football loudmouths. Ryan also looks great to the fantasy crowd since he has had some pro bowl type receivers his whole career. Matthew Stafford in this crowd too. Guys who haven't won shit but hey they put up fantasy stats so HOF here we come.
Brady?
I hope Wilson gets to be the highest paid QB in NFL history.
Meanwhile Rivers is underrated because he's played for a dysfunctional, snake bitten franchise.
Quote:
1. Brady
2. Peyton
3. Rogers
4. Brees
5. Big Ben
6. Eli
7. Luck
8. Wilson
9. Flacco
10. Rivers
Best of the rest- Romo, Ryan, Stafford
The rest are either too young to know what they are or not worth ranking. No one should come before Brady and Peyton, they have both demonstrated for 15 years that any team they quarterback will have a winning record every year.
I have Luck passing Brees right now. He's just too good and never had anything close to a Jimmy Graham, still doesn't.
Not so fast.
I want to see him play a decent game against the Patriots first. Here's a guy who beat the 49ers and Seahawks two years ago and makes the Patriots look like '85 Bears every damn time.
Luck is a good QB but does benefit greatly from positive media and fan bias. He might have thrown the most playoff INTs of all QBs the last 2-3 seasons.
Like someone else said, this is not about history. This ranking is really about who would be better RIGHT NOW.
Giants fans like to get on rivers and Ben because they were in the same Eli draft so there were too many annoying comparisons early on. I get it but now that Eli has earned his accolades I feel like it's easy to appreciate the talents of rivers and Ben. Both guys can play.
Really? A two time Super Bowl winning QB who stands in the pocket and gets roasted while having one of best statistical career years last year?
A mystery. Really.
Like someone else said, this is not about history. This ranking is really about who would be better RIGHT NOW.
Another mystery. 2 time SB MVP versus a youngun who throws massive amounts of playoff picks.
That has me befuddled, too.
Quote:
Watch Wilson struggle. Great kid and leader but not the main reason that team wins. I'd take Philip Rivers over him any day
I hope Wilson gets to be the highest paid QB in NFL history.
Meanwhile Rivers is underrated because he's played for a dysfunctional, snake bitten franchise.
Wait, are you telling me... Archie Manning was RIGHT?
At any given point throughout his career he has had one of the greatest TE's in the history of the game, a great stable of RB's and possibly the best WR tandem in the NFL and every year what has he done with it?
After 2015, these rankings will change dramatically.
Consider that in a 10-team league, Eli is (in theory) the last starting QB taken and thus, a starting fantasy QB. Now I don't know about you, but in the leagues I've played in, Eli is usually a backup on most teams. I'm usually trying to grab him as my backup.
Rodgers: 65.6 completion%, 8.4 YPA, 38 TDs, 5 INTs, 112.2 QB rating, 82.64 QBR, 12 wins, 4 losses.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Romo: 61.3 completion%, 7.7 YPA, 26 TDs, 14 INTs, 91.4 QB rating, 48.99 QBR, 8 wins, 5 losses.
Manning: 63.1 completion%, 7.3 YPA, 30 TDs, 14 INTs, 92.1 QB rating, 70.93 QBR, 6 wins, 10 losses.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
Rodgers: 65.6 completion%, 8.4 YPA, 38 TDs, 5 INTs, 112.2 QB rating, 82.64 QBR, 12 wins, 4 losses.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Romo: 61.3 completion%, 7.7 YPA, 26 TDs, 14 INTs, 91.4 QB rating, 48.99 QBR, 8 wins, 5 losses.
Manning: 63.1 completion%, 7.3 YPA, 30 TDs, 14 INTs, 92.1 QB rating, 70.93 QBR, 6 wins, 10 losses.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
You can keep your consistency and I'll take the guy who can play the game with ice in his veins, balls to the wall when it is all on the line. And come out on top.
Stats are used to compile top ten lists like the one being discussed. If it wasn't about stats and production, and just about championships Manning and Roethlisberger would be ranked much higher. But they are not, so it has to be about something else.
I am very comfortable with Romo this year because I know he will produce another great year. It's up to the rest of the team to produce at his level.
Rodgers: 65.6 completion%, 8.4 YPA, 38 TDs, 5 INTs, 112.2 QB rating, 82.64 QBR, 12 wins, 4 losses.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Romo: 61.3 completion%, 7.7 YPA, 26 TDs, 14 INTs, 91.4 QB rating, 48.99 QBR, 8 wins, 5 losses.
Manning: 63.1 completion%, 7.3 YPA, 30 TDs, 14 INTs, 92.1 QB rating, 70.93 QBR, 6 wins, 10 losses.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
He was also 23rd in attempts, which was the fewest among any QB with 14 or more starts. To me that tells me if he doesnt tneed to throw it, then isnt as valuable as one thinks.
Compared to Murray, who rushed the ball 80 times more than the next highest carrier. Plus his 57 catches. That shows me that Murray, not Romo, was their MVP and not even particular close either. They depended on Murray far more than Romo. It could even be argued that Bryant and a few of their OL were more valuable than Romo.
Dont look at just stats. I have no problems saying Romo was good last year, but I do have a problem with peopel saying he was the MVP of the team or best player on the team. He went along for the ride.
I am very comfortable with Romo this year because I know he will produce another great year. It's up to the rest of the team to produce at his level.
I think the OL, Murray, and Dez were just fine last year. But, hey... lets be happy their season didnt end with a Romo interception like it usually does.
Quote:
Romo: 69.9 completion%, 8.5 YPA, 34 TDs, 9 INTs, 113.2 QB rating, 82.75 QBR, 12 wins, 3 losses.
Rodgers: 65.6 completion%, 8.4 YPA, 38 TDs, 5 INTs, 112.2 QB rating, 82.64 QBR, 12 wins, 4 losses.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Romo: 61.3 completion%, 7.7 YPA, 26 TDs, 14 INTs, 91.4 QB rating, 48.99 QBR, 8 wins, 5 losses.
Manning: 63.1 completion%, 7.3 YPA, 30 TDs, 14 INTs, 92.1 QB rating, 70.93 QBR, 6 wins, 10 losses.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
He was also 23rd in attempts, which was the fewest among any QB with 14 or more starts. To me that tells me if he doesnt tneed to throw it, then isnt as valuable as one thinks.
Compared to Murray, who rushed the ball 80 times more than the next highest carrier. Plus his 57 catches. That shows me that Murray, not Romo, was their MVP and not even particular close either. They depended on Murray far more than Romo. It could even be argued that Bryant and a few of their OL were more valuable than Romo.
Dont look at just stats. I have no problems saying Romo was good last year, but I do have a problem with peopel saying he was the MVP of the team or best player on the team. He went along for the ride.
The answer to your MVP question is the Arizona game.
With Romo out, Arizona concentrated on stopping the run. Dallas was held to a season low in rushing yards. Arizona challenged Weeden, and Weeden couldn't make the plays in the passing game to make Arizona pay. Had Romo been available, Arizona would not have crowded the LOS. If Arizona had crowded the LOS, Romo would have made them pay.
Teams couldn't stack the LOS to stop Murray because of Romo. If teams chose to stop Murray, Romo would have a field day passing.
Now that Murray is gone, the true MVP of Dallas will be revealed. It will be revealed that Romo is the MVP of Dallas.
1 game does or never will tell the hwole story.
Not sure I agree with that top ten list.
Rodgers: 65.6 completion%, 8.4 YPA, 38 TDs, 5 INTs, 112.2 QB rating, 82.64 QBR, 12 wins, 4 losses.
Rodgers was better in two categories, TDs and INTs. On TDs, Rodgers had 4 more, but it took 85 more attempts. Rodgers was actually only better than Romo in one category last year, INTs.
When it comes to Manning, last year was his best statistical year. Compare this to Romo's worst statistical year, 2008.
Romo: 61.3 completion%, 7.7 YPA, 26 TDs, 14 INTs, 91.4 QB rating, 48.99 QBR, 8 wins, 5 losses.
Manning: 63.1 completion%, 7.3 YPA, 30 TDs, 14 INTs, 92.1 QB rating, 70.93 QBR, 6 wins, 10 losses.
Statistically, Romo's worst season is the equal of Manning's best season.
The opposing argument will be that NY has won two championships under Manning and Dallas has won none under Romo. This argument is flawed.
Russell Wilson has won a SB and just barely lost another in his first two years of his career. He is ranked in the top ten and he shouldn't even be ranked in the top ten. In his two years Seattle has had the top defense and running game in the NFL. This is why Seattle has gone to the last two Super Bowls. Teams win championships, not individuals. Put Wilson on Cleveland or Jacksonville and ask him to carry the team, and Cleveland and Jacksonville wouldn't even be a .500 team.
The reason why Romo is ranked so high has to do with his consistently really good to great production year after year. Had the rest of his teammates performed at his level, Dallas would have won multiple championships by now. It takes ALL 53 men on the roster to win a championship. The best example is Malcom Butler. Butler was a role player that made the play that won a championship. If Butler doesn't make that play, Brady doesn't win another SB and Wilson would be 2 for 2.
Consistent production year in, year out are a better measure of a QB. Championships are for teams.
Good post.
Romo's 3rd and 22 conversion in Seattle this year was huge.
If that was a playoff game, it would be historic.
Some will argue about the Dez Bryant non TD being a TD in this year's playoffs.
You'll get your Wilson wish in a year or two probably. There were games this year that the Seahawks struggled just because they didn't have their best defensive players (Bobby Wagner, Brandon Mebane) in a few games.
If either Ryan, Stafford or Dalton ever got to Conference championship game even I could listen to an argument, but with the lack of playoff success none of them should sniff the top 10.