Martavis Bryant

[Bigappleyinzer]

well the rings and not being a total little douche who falls apart late in the year

Just think, something as innocuous as a extra point will forever define Romo as a QB...

 

[t-man]

Careful with this argument.

Because the rings are the only thing that separate Romo and Big Ben.

When you start talking about rating a player, I would say Super Bowl rings enter into the discussion, but to say they are the sole best measure of a quarterbacks ability, well, that leaves you with needing to argue that-

Dilfer>Marino.

So, yeah, uh, I don't think that's quite right.

Should they be discussed, well, yes, so long as you're taking into account all the factors that go into a team winning the Superbowl, and realize that the TRUE best measure of a quarterback is a combination of stats, and then to talk about the intangibles, like leadership, which is where the discussion of Superbowl wins comes into play.

Joe

 

[Bigappleyinzer]

When you start talking about rating a player, I would say Super Bowl rings enter into the discussion, but to say they are the sole best measure of a quarterbacks ability, well, that leaves you with needing to argue that-

Dilfer>Marino.

So, yeah, uh, I don't think that's quite right.

Should they be discussed, well, yes, so long as you're taking into account all the factors that go into a team winning the Superbowl, and realize that the TRUE best measure of a quarterback is a combination of stats, and then to talk about the intangibles, like leadership, which is where the discussion of Superbowl wins comes into play.

Joe

Oh I agree with 100%. It takes 22 men working well together to win the big one.

I was just saying that your analogy is somewhat exaggerated. Wilson is already much better than Trent ever was, and Luck isnt quite Marino as of right now.

 

[Wingman]

Back to the original point about Bryant, when this guy becomes a bit more seasoned he will be fantastic if he keeps this up. The thing that will happen to defenders will be covering these two guys will take the entire secondary hell I could get open on a route if they manage to cover them, and I am old and slow, hell I make Heath look blazing fast.

 

[paperclip]

When you start talking about rating a player, I would say Super Bowl rings enter into the discussion, but to say they are the sole best measure of a quarterbacks ability, well, that leaves you with needing to argue that-

Dilfer>Marino.

So, yeah, uh, I don't think that's quite right.

Should they be discussed, well, yes, so long as you're taking into account all the factors that go into a team winning the Superbowl, and realize that the TRUE best measure of a quarterback is a combination of stats, and then to talk about the intangibles, like leadership, which is where the discussion of Superbowl wins comes into play.

Joe

The Dilfer/Marino thing. Ouch. When we're talking one ring, you can use stats to say Marino was a better QB. But when there are TWO rings involved, it changes the discussion. All of those stats don't matter when a QB can win the dance more than once.

 

[Vader]

Careful with this argument.

Because the rings are the only thing that separate Romo and Big Ben.

No what separates them is rings, playoff record, regular season record, TD passes, total yards passing, game winning drives and come backs during the playoffs among other things.

 

[Idioteque]

The Dilfer/Marino thing. Ouch. When we're talking one ring, you can use stats to say Marino was a better QB. But when there are TWO rings involved, it changes the discussion. All of those stats don't matter when a QB can win the dance more than once.

Wilson has only won one ring, not two.

 

[Superman]

No what separates them is rings, playoff record, regular season record, TD passes, total yards passing, game winning drives and come backs during the playoffs among other things.

actually, that's not entirely correct

Romo's career
completions/ attempts 2604/4017
yards 31,563
Completion % 64.8
Avg 7.86
TDs 223
INTs 107
Fumbles 57
Games 138
Rating 96.2
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5209/tony-romo

Ben
Comp/Att 2980/4684
Yards 36,825
Completion % 63.6
Avg. 7.86
TDs 241
Ints 125
Fumbles 75
Games 152
Rating 93.9
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5536/ben-roethlisberger

they are fairly close overall, though I would take Ben 10 times out of 10 to be my QB

 

[Vader]

actually, that's not entirely correct

Romo's career
completions/ attempts 2604/4017
yards 31,563
Completion % 64.8
Avg 7.86
TDs 223
INTs 107
Fumbles 57
Games 138
Rating 96.2
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5209/tony-romo

Ben
Comp/Att 2980/4684
Yards 36,825
Completion % 63.6
Avg. 7.86
TDs 241
Ints 125
Fumbles 75
Games 152
Rating 93.9
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5536/ben-roethlisberger

they are fairly close overall, though I would take Ben 10 times out of 10 to be my QB

Where was I wrong? I said TD passes... Romo has 223, Ben has 241. Then I said total yards passing. Romo has 31,563. Ben has 36,825. Where exactly was I wrong?

 

[Superman]

Where was I wrong? I said TD passes... Romo has 223, Ben has 241. Then I said total yards passing. Romo has 31,563. Ben has 36,825. Where exactly was I wrong?

it's a bit difficult to match that when Romo hasn't played as many games as Ben. Kinda have to play the same number of games to have a good shot at the same identical numbers across the board...whereas everything else is fairly even.

 

[Bigappleyinzer]

it's a bit difficult to match that when Romo hasn't played as many games as Ben. Kinda have to play the same number of games to have a good shot at the same identical numbers across the board...whereas everything else is fairly even.

Exactly my point...

Most sane people are going to take Ben over Romo 9 out 10 times, without question. But statistically, they are very similar. Which is why statistics can not always explain the entire story.

 

[Vader]

it's a bit difficult to match that when Romo hasn't played as many games as Ben. Kinda have to play the same number of games to have a good shot at the same identical numbers across the board...whereas everything else is fairly even.

So I wasn't wrong but you wanted to make it seem like I was wrong by adding things I didn't say? They aren't "fairly" even in playoff wins, SB wins, or SB appearances. They are only "fairly" even in areas that I didn't mention. bigapple mentioned ONE thing that separated them. I added a few more.

 

[Vader]

Exactly my point...

Most sane people are going to take Ben over Romo 9 out 10 times, without question. But statistically, they are very similar. Which is why statistics can not always explain the entire story.

It wasn't just about stats. You mentioned one thing. I added several more including playoff records, game winning drives etc... not just stats.

 

[Superman]

So I wasn't wrong but you wanted to make it seem like I was wrong by adding things I didn't say? They aren't "fairly" even in playoff wins, SB wins, or SB appearances. They are only "fairly" even in areas that I didn't mention. bigapple mentioned ONE thing that separated them. I added a few more.

I am not saying you are WRONG.

good goddamn.

why must every thread be about right or wrong? All I stated was that they're very similar statistically-speaking.

people want to "discuss" football, but they have to always be "right"

 

[Vader]

I am not saying you are WRONG.

good goddamn.

why must every thread be about right or wrong? All I stated was that they're very similar statistically-speaking.

people want to "discuss" football, but they have to always be "right"

That is NOT all you stated. So you didn't also say:

actually, that's not entirely correct

So not entirely correct doesn't mean WRONG? I said what I said. Then you came in and stated that I wasn't ENTIRELY correct. But the fact is that I was ENTIRELY correct. You just added **** that I didn't say.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

It's "Martavius". Coach Cool Shades says so.

 

[Superman]

That is NOT all you stated. So you didn't also say:



So not entirely correct doesn't mean WRONG? I said what I said. Then you came in and stated that I wasn't ENTIRELY correct. But the fact is that I was ENTIRELY correct. You just added **** that I didn't say.

...................

 

[Superman]

You are right, Vader.
Yet Romo's stats and Ben's stats are nearly identical at this point...and Ben has played in more games.

 

[Wingman]

Actually a case could be made that Romo has better numbers in some areas, and if given an additional season could put up better numbers. I would have to say that the numbers are very similar and that just based on the stats it would be hard to separate them. I love the face palm photo.

 

[Vader]

You are right, Vader.
Yet Romo's stats and Ben's stats are nearly identical at this point...and Ben has played in more games.

I never agued that they weren't. That was never the discussion.

 

[Vader]

Actually a case could be made that Romo has better numbers in some areas, and if given an additional season could put up better numbers. I would have to say that the numbers are very similar and that just based on the stats it would be hard to separate them. I love the face palm photo.

To bad the face palm photo isn't apropos to the situation since their stats were never what was being discussed.

 

[Superman]

I never agued that they weren't. That was never the discussion.

yet you went ballisticaly ape **** because of what then?
and if you can't see that their numbers are pretty even across the board, then your black and gold blinders are on pretty tight.

 

[21STEELERS21]

How many rings does Romo have? Using my rating methodology it's Ben 2 Romo 0.

 

[Vader]

yet you went ballisticaly ape **** because of what then?
and if you can't see that their numbers are pretty even across the board, then your black and gold blinders are on pretty tight.

I'll type this slowly for you since you can't seem to understand it.

1. bigapple said the ONLY difference in Ben and Romo is RINGs
2. I said no, there are other things like playoff wins, TD passes ETC
3. You chime in and started comparing ALL their stats because you either misread my post, didn't understand the discussion, or read into the discussion what you wanted to see
4. I never went ape **** even though you misrepresented what I said
5. You post stupid face palm pictures even though you still don't understand what is being discussed.
6. For about the 5 time... I NEVER SAID THEIR STATS WEREN'T SIMILAR. THAT WASN'T THE ******* DISCUSSION.

Now I expect you to feign ignorance and pretend that you don't understand what I just wrote and start talking about their stats again.

 

[Superman]

I'll type this slowly for you since you can't seem to understand it.

1. bigapple said the ONLY difference in Ben and Romo is RINGs
2. I said no, there are other things like playoff wins, TD passes ETC
3. You chime in and started comparing ALL their stats because you either misread my post, didn't understand the discussion, or read into the discussion what you wanted to see
4. I never went ape **** even though you misrepresented what I said
5. You post stupid face palm pictures even though you still don't understand what is being discussed.
6. For about the 5 time... I NEVER SAID THEIR STATS WEREN'T SIMILAR. THAT WASN'T THE ******* DISCUSSION.

Now I expect you to feign ignorance and pretend that you don't understand what I just wrote and start talking about their stats again.

so you said ....

2. I said no, there are other things like playoff wins, TD passes ETC

to which I posted, as you clearly stated:

3. You chime in and started comparing ALL their stats

then lose your **** again. really?