Rodgers vs. Romo

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Rodgers and it isn't even close.

 

I actually think he is better than his stats show as I believe MM holds him back with his pathetic play calling at times.

 

I notice a lot of people not giving Romo a lot of love. Now I understand that he hasn't fared well in December but seriously he has only been playing around 2 1/2 years. That is not enough time to say he always does not do well in big games. Here are some other facts. He was in the Pro Bowl his first two years. He has like the highest winning percentage of any quarterback and QB rating who has ever started their first forty games. He is fourth fastest qb to get 100 tds in nfl history.

 

 

Also, he is very mobile and it is rare to find a QB who can pass and who is also mobile, any thoughts on this matter?

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Quality wins? HAHAHAHA

 

I realize you are an incredible homer, but I thought you had some small chance to be objective about players....

 

Since Rodgers numbers dwarf Romo's, you are going to come up with your "quality wins" critieria.... You do realize that neither of these players play any defense. Rodgers threw for almost 700 yards and 5 total touchdowns along with 68 rushing yards in two losses to Minn. He scored a ton of points for the Packers against a very good team, and the defense blew it big time. (As they did just this last week in Pitt -- Rodgers had over 400 yards and 4 TDs; 36 points (including a missed chipshot FG) and led his team down the field for the game-winning TD...)

 

Romo actually did much less against PHI and NO (a grand total of two whole touchdown passes for both games together) but was fortunate enough to be one man on a 53-man team that had a defense that played much better than the Packers....

Don't get me wrong, I like Romo a lot (he's a good Wisconsin boy)..... but "quality wins" scenario is what people use to argue for talentless quarterbacks when they can't argue based upon stats -- see Dilfer and Dilfer Sr. (a.k.a. Tom Brady )

Romo is a good QB on his own; you don't need to make up crazy "quality wins" critieria -- that rely heavily on so many things besides quarterbacking (defense, special teams, running game, coaching, ability to hit chip-shot field goals, etc.)

 

Don't even get me started on escapability..... Rodgers is way faster than Romo and because of the Packers piss-poor O-line play for most of the season has had much more practice with it.......

 

 

Okay here is my objective analysis of his so called bad games in December. In my view, what happened in Seattle at the end was simply a fluke, it could have happened to anyone. Also, he did play a great game overall. Against the Giants in the playoffs, the Cowboys had already beaten them twice in the regular season that year. It is very hard to beat a good team three times in one year. Last year, they had McBriar out and Nick Folk out which took away their entire special teams games. They also had Romo out for like three games and had Felix out basically the entire season. Those are the reasons last year they did not make the playoffs. Plus they lost three very close games they could have won last year which was against Pitt, Arizona and the Ravens.......all of which were top 4 teams. Finally, against the Eagles last game of the year, that is really the only game I would say he did not play well at all in December, but it is hard to perform when you are benched by the coach because the D gives up 30 something points early.

[gtthom86 5]

I'm not saying that Romo is a bad QB, or even bad in December. Much of his statistical success and win/loss record is due to the fact the his owner will stop at nothing to bring in quality players and coaches. Romo is a good QB that is surrounded by lots of talent and he capitalizes on it.

 

 

Rodgers is a first round pick, should have gone first overall, and has played lights out in his first two years of starting. He overcame the lack of an offensive line and has put up incredible numbers not only from the pocket but also on the ground. Every analyst in the business will agree he has ascended to the ranks of elite QBs, i'm talking top 5 talent at the position.

 

Romo just isn't on his level talent wise.

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

I'm not saying that Romo is a bad QB, or even bad in December. Much of his statistical success and win/loss record is due to the fact the his owner will stop at nothing to bring in quality players and coaches. Romo is a good QB that is surrounded by lots of talent and he capitalizes on it.

Rodgers is a first round pick, should have gone first overall, and has played lights out in his first two years of starting. He overcame the lack of an offensive line and has put up incredible numbers not only from the pocket but also on the ground. Every analyst in the business will agree he has ascended to the ranks of elite QBs, i'm talking top 5 talent at the position.

 

Romo just isn't on his level talent wise.

LOL...I went to go do all the math for Brady and Manning's first 40 games to compare them to Romo. But when I did Manning's alone it was quite obvious his numbers are not even CLOSE to Romo's numbers. It's actually quite funny. Almost every stat there is (except of course Playoff wins, although he was tied with Manning) he dominates Brady and Manning. I didn't even finish cause it was such a waste of time. Go try it anyone who thinks otherwise. Even I didn't think it was going to be that bad. And remember it's first 40 games NOT first 3 seasons, and if you don't know why it's not first 3 seasons then you should get your head examined.

 

Yards, rating, YPA, completion percentage....whatever you want. it's there to see for yourselves. It's absolutely dominating. 17 games with over 300 yards in 40 total? That's amazing. Anyway, it's not like anyone that hates on Romo is going to be convinced of anything tonight. We'll see what happens when they win a playoff game. But I do find it hard to believe if Romo even wins the Super Bowl this year all the haters will stop. They'll come up with an excuse....although I'm not sure what it would be as his numbers would easily put him in the top 3 with a Super Bowl ring. I'm crazy for saying it I know....but hey, at least the stats back up what I'm saying...not just using a "win a Super Bowl" line.

[gtthom86 5]

LOL...I went to go do all the math for Brady and Manning's first 40 games to compare them to Romo. But when I did Manning's alone it was quite obvious his numbers are not even CLOSE to Romo's numbers. It's actually quite funny. Almost every stat there is (except of course Playoff wins, although he was tied with Manning) he dominates Brady and Manning. I didn't even finish cause it was such a waste of time. Go try it anyone who thinks otherwise. Even I didn't think it was going to be that bad. And remember it's first 40 games NOT first 3 seasons, and if you don't know why it's not first 3 seasons then you should get your head examined.

 

Yards, rating, YPA, completion percentage....whatever you want. it's there to see for yourselves. It's absolutely dominating. 17 games with over 300 yards in 40 total? That's amazing. Anyway, it's not like anyone that hates on Romo is going to be convinced of anything tonight. We'll see what happens when they win a playoff game. But I do find it hard to believe if Romo even wins the Super Bowl this year all the haters will stop. They'll come up with an excuse....although I'm not sure what it would be as his numbers would easily put him in the top 3 with a Super Bowl ring. I'm crazy for saying it I know....but hey, at least the stats back up what I'm saying...not just using a "win a Super Bowl" line.

 

 

Dude, you are arguing completely irrelevant points. What is your point? Are we looking at Rodgers vs Romo here or not? Are we talking who is better now or who will have a better career? You are all over the place.

 

 

Anyway, the brady and manning stuff - you have to take into consideration that they both started far earlier in their respective careers. manning started from day one on the leagues worst team. brady was thrown into the playoffs as a rookie and started in his second season. And believe me, romo dreams that he will have the post season success that brady and manning already have had. but, i digress.....

 

 

The thread is about romo vs rodgers right now, and rodgers is clearly the better QB

[Houston Texans 10]

I notice a lot of people not giving Romo a lot of love. Now I understand that he hasn't fared well in December but seriously he has only been playing around 2 1/2 years. That is not enough time to say he always does not do well in big games.

So, you're saying that because Romo has only been playing 2.5 years, it's too early to say he does not do well in big games?

 

Yet, your 1st post of this thread said:

what game has Rodgers won??? How many playoff wins does he have??? How many Superbowl rings???

despite the fact that Rodgers has only been playing for 1.5 years? So Romo gets a pass because he only has been playing for 2.5 years so it's too early to say he can't win the big games, but at the same time, you rank Romo ahead of Rodgers (despite all of Rodgers' statistical superiority) because Rodgers hasn't won the big game, even though he's been a starting NFL QB for a year less than Romo?

 

No wonder so many posters here think you're a moron.

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Dude, you are arguing completely irrelevant points. What is your point? Are we looking at Rodgers vs Romo here or not? Are we talking who is better now or who will have a better career? You are all over the place.

Anyway, the brady and manning stuff - you have to take into consideration that they both started far earlier in their respective careers. manning started from day one on the leagues worst team. brady was thrown into the playoffs as a rookie and started in his second season. And believe me, romo dreams that he will have the post season success that brady and manning already have had. but, i digress.....

The thread is about romo vs rodgers right now, and rodgers is clearly the better QB

 

 

Romo finds himself in very exclusive company in the most important indicator of them all.

 

Cleveland's Otto Graham is No. 1 on the YPA list (8.63). Not so coincidentally, he was the most successful quarterback in history, leading his Browns to six straight championship games in his six seasons as an NFL quarterback (1950-55), winning three of them. (Graham also led the Browns to four straight championships in the AAFC before the club joined the NFL -- he averaged a stunning 9.51 yards per attempt against that league's inferior competition.)

 

Chicago's Sid Luckman is No. 2 on the YPA list (8.42). Not so coincidentally, he was the most successful quarterback of the 1940s, virtually inventing the modern position that we know today while leading the Bears to four NFL titles.

 

Then there's Romo at No. 3. Following Sunday's performance, he has averaged 8.18 yards per pass attempt in his career. To put this figure another way, it makes Romo more effective at getting the ball down field than any passer since Graham hung up the black high-tops 54 years ago.

 

That's elite company.

 

Romo's career YPA is higher than Aaron Rodgers. This stat is the single most important indicator of a top qb. Also, add in rodgers 15-15 record as a starter and Romo's 31-15 record since his first full year as a starter.

 

Romo is the winner in win/loss and YPA. End of discussion. I am done with you. Thread over. Romo wins.

[jgcrawfish 232]

LOL...I went to go do all the math for Brady and Manning's first 40 games to compare them to Romo. But when I did Manning's alone it was quite obvious his numbers are not even CLOSE to Romo's numbers. It's actually quite funny. Almost every stat there is (except of course Playoff wins, although he was tied with Manning) he dominates Brady and Manning. I didn't even finish cause it was such a waste of time. Go try it anyone who thinks otherwise. Even I didn't think it was going to be that bad. And remember it's first 40 games NOT first 3 seasons, and if you don't know why it's not first 3 seasons then you should get your head examined.

 

Yards, rating, YPA, completion percentage....whatever you want. it's there to see for yourselves. It's absolutely dominating. 17 games with over 300 yards in 40 total? That's amazing. Anyway, it's not like anyone that hates on Romo is going to be convinced of anything tonight. We'll see what happens when they win a playoff game. But I do find it hard to believe if Romo even wins the Super Bowl this year all the haters will stop. They'll come up with an excuse....although I'm not sure what it would be as his numbers would easily put him in the top 3 with a Super Bowl ring. I'm crazy for saying it I know....but hey, at least the stats back up what I'm saying...not just using a "win a Super Bowl" line.

 

Manning went to a lottery team you dimwit. Tony Romo inherited a team with 13 freakin probowlers. you can't compare them.

 

for all pointing out the 2.5 vs 1.5 seasons. It's not even that close. It's 53 games to 30 games. 23 games difference is an extra season and a half of experience.

 

If the pimptaddy alias-creating, ballot-stuffing contingent would like me to, I can go back and compare Romo's first 30 games to Rodgers and really bury Romo. Because it's even more warped in young Rodgers favor then.

 

again, it's Rodgers, and it ain't even focking close. anybody who says Romo is likely a Cowboy homer or doesn't know sh!t about football (which is redundant, I know).

[Houston Texans 10]

Romo's career YPA is higher than Aaron Rodgers. This stat is the single most important indicator of a top qb. Also, add in rodgers 15-15 record as a starter and Romo's 31-15 record since his first full year as a starter.

 

Romo is the winner in win/loss and YPA. End of discussion. I am done with you. Thread over. Romo wins.

Actually, it's not. TD to INT ratio is the most important indicator of a top QB, and in that category, Rodgers has Romo beat handily. Also, when games matter (in December and playoffs) Rodgers has a better win/loss record than Romo.

 

End of discussion, thread over, Rodgers wins.

[gtthom86 5]

Romo finds himself in very exclusive company in the most important indicator of them all.

 

Cleveland's Otto Graham is No. 1 on the YPA list (8.63). Not so coincidentally, he was the most successful quarterback in history, leading his Browns to six straight championship games in his six seasons as an NFL quarterback (1950-55), winning three of them. (Graham also led the Browns to four straight championships in the AAFC before the club joined the NFL -- he averaged a stunning 9.51 yards per attempt against that league's inferior competition.)

 

Chicago's Sid Luckman is No. 2 on the YPA list (8.42). Not so coincidentally, he was the most successful quarterback of the 1940s, virtually inventing the modern position that we know today while leading the Bears to four NFL titles.

 

Then there's Romo at No. 3. Following Sunday's performance, he has averaged 8.18 yards per pass attempt in his career. To put this figure another way, it makes Romo more effective at getting the ball down field than any passer since Graham hung up the black high-tops 54 years ago.

 

That's elite company.

 

Romo's career YPA is higher than Aaron Rodgers. This stat is the single most important indicator of a top qb. Also, add in rodgers 15-15 record as a starter and Romo's 31-15 record since his first full year as a starter.

 

Romo is the winner in win/loss and YPA. End of discussion. I am done with you. Thread over. Romo wins.

 

 

 

Seriously dude? you take a single statistic and skew it back to the 40's and 50's before the NFL and AFL even merged? do you understand how different the game is nowadays?

 

Yeah, the thread is over because you argue like an incoherent retard. and no, romo lost.

 

also, please stop posting forever. thank you

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Seriously dude? you take a single statistic and skew it back to the 40's and 50's before the NFL and AFL even merged? do you understand how different the game is nowadays?

 

Yeah, the thread is over because you argue like an incoherent retard. and no, romo lost.

 

also, please stop posting forever. thank you

fair enough.......so that makes romo #1 all time.

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Actually, it's not. TD to INT ratio is the most important indicator of a top QB, and in that category, Rodgers has Romo beat handily. Also, when games matter (in December and playoffs) Rodgers has a better win/loss record than Romo.

 

End of discussion, thread over, Rodgers wins.

 

 

2-4 in december and zero playoff appearances is good?

[Houston Texans 10]

2-4 in december and zero playoff appearances is good?

It's 3-4. Are you so stupid that you can't even count to 7?

 

And that's a hell of a lot better than 6-10 in December and 0-2 in the playoffs.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Purple_Reign

Dallas_empire

Pimptaddy

Blue_star_wrecking_crew

Tony Romo Domination

Frank_Rizzio (not to be confused with Frank Rizzio, completely different person)

PsychoBellichickAssjockey

Bellechick's Body Guard

 

Did I miss any?

[Houston Texans 10]

17 games with over 300 yards in 40 total? That's amazing.

Yes, it is. Almost as amazing as 15 games with 300 total yards out of 30 total games.

 

BTW-The QB who I'm referring to is Aaron Rodgers. Once again you throw out a random stat to try to prove Romo is better, but it actually proves the opposite. Maybe you should admit that you are wrong?

[Sho Nuff 720]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...&p=11285736

Thief.

 

 

No answer to that one thief?

[JL84 0]

I notice a lot of people not giving Romo a lot of love. Now I understand that he hasn't fared well in December but seriously he has only been playing around 2 1/2 years. That is not enough time to say he always does not do well in big games. Here are some other facts. He was in the Pro Bowl his first two years. He has like the highest winning percentage of any quarterback and QB rating who has ever started their first forty games. He is fourth fastest qb to get 100 tds in nfl history.

Also, he is very mobile and it is rare to find a QB who can pass and who is also mobile, any thoughts on this matter?

 

I just wanted to touch one the part I put in bold above. Let us look at rushing stats for the current year...

 

Romo

Att/Yds/Avg/TD

31/109/3.5/1

 

Rodgers

Att/Yds/Avg/TD

55 /305/5.5/4

 

So...who is more mobile?

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

I just wanted to touch one the part I put in bold above. Let us look at rushing stats for the current year...

 

Romo

Att/Yds/Avg/TD

31/109/3.5/1

 

Rodgers

Att/Yds/Avg/TD

55 /305/5.5/4

 

So...who is more mobile?

 

 

well the sack total for each guy says a different story. Rodgers is a tackling dummy while romo rarly gets sacked. Rodgers cant avoid the rush,while romo side steps it and stays upright.

[Sho Nuff 720]

well the sack total for each guy says a different story. Rodgers is a tackling dummy while romo rarly gets sacked. Rodgers cant avoid the rush,while romo side steps it and stays upright.

 

Sack total is not the same as mobility.

and Rodgers has avoided quite a few this year.

 

Or did you steal this post from someone else as well?

[Blue_Star_Wrecking_Crew 0]

Sack total is not the same as mobility.

and Rodgers has avoided quite a few this year.

 

Or did you steal this post from someone else as well?

 

For all the talk about the Cowboys not being able to win big games, Romo has now taken down a 13-0 Saints team (2009) and a 10-0 Indianapolis squad (2006).

 

In his fourth season as a starter, Romo, an undrafted free agent out of Eastern Illinois, had a 36-17 record through Week 15 of the 2009 season.

 

 

Bro, how is a QB who's never even played in a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB whose never even had a winning season not bottom five? A-rod is Trent Edwards with nice stats and an awesome set of WRs. The guy just doesn't come through in the clutch. Romo is money in that two minute drill. Romo is basically a top five QB.

[ffsmack 0]

For all the talk about the Cowboys not being able to win big games, Romo has now taken down a 13-0 Saints team (2009) and a 10-0 Indianapolis squad (2006).

 

In his fourth season as a starter, Romo, an undrafted free agent out of Eastern Illinois, had a 36-17 record through Week 15 of the 2009 season.

Bro, how is a QB who's never even played in a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB whose never even had a winning season not bottom five? A-rod is Trent Edwards with nice stats and an awesome set of WRs. The guy just doesn't come through in the clutch. Romo is money in that two minute drill. Romo is basically a top five QB.

If Rodgers can't be better than Romo because he has never been in the playoffs, then Romo can't be better than Grossman because he has never won a playoff game

[49ers_suck 0]

ok, some of you are ridiculous.

 

saying Romo is not in the same league as Rodgers is stupid. really, what has Rodgers done? he's having a very good year, but to say he's >>>>>>>>than Romo is just false.

 

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters. im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

[Houston Texans 10]

Bro, how is a QB who's never even played in a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB whose never even had a winning season not bottom five? A-rod is Trent Edwards with nice stats and an awesome set of WRs. The guy just doesn't come through in the clutch. Romo is money in that two minute drill. Romo is basically a top five QB.

Bro, how is a QB who's never even won a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB who has never had a winning record when it counts (December & playoffs) not bottom five? Tony Homo is Ryan Leaf, except he has a lot of talent around him. The guy just doesn't come through when it matters. Rodgers is money in that two minute drill. Rodgers is a top five QB.

 

See, anyone can do the bullshit you do. The facts (stats, performance, etc) PROVE that Rodgers is better than Romo. You can't come up with stats to prove Romo is better, so you just keep saying it, hoping that will make it true.

 

Romo has a better YPA (slightly), and a better winning record over the last 4 years. The winning record, however, is due more to the talent around him, rather than a result of Romo. Rodgers has a .500 record, but he has done it with inferior talent.

 

Rodgers is the better QB. Rodgers will have the better career. Rodgers will win more playoff games. Romo will be a good FF quarterback, but he's not suited to win games when they matter.

[Phurfur 70]

ok, some of you are ridiculous.

 

saying Romo is not in the same league as Rodgers is stupid. really, what has Rodgers done? he's having a very good year, but to say he's >>>>>>>>than Romo is just false.

 

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters. im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

 

 

Anyone that watches these two play can see that one QB is a notch above the other.

[49ers_suck 0]

Bro, how is a QB who's never even won a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB who has never had a winning record when it counts (December & playoffs) not bottom five? Tony Homo is Ryan Leaf, except he has a lot of talent around him. The guy just doesn't come through when it matters. Rodgers is money in that two minute drill. Rodgers is a top five QB.

 

way to contradict yourself. you're already annointing Rodgers. you're as bad as the guys that annointed Romo from the get go.

 

See, anyone can do the bullshit you do. The facts (stats, performance, etc) PROVE that Rodgers is better than Romo. You can't come up with stats to prove Romo is better, so you just keep saying it, hoping that will make it true.

 

really? Romo has had outstanding numbers since he took over the starting job. so has Rodgers. but we're talking about a couple years here. you guys who say Rodgers>>>>>>>>Romo hate the Cowboys, period. disclaimer: i have no problem with saying Rodgers is better than Romo. but he's not WAY better.

 

Romo has a better YPA (slightly), and a better winning record over the last 4 years. The winning record, however, is due more to the talent around him, rather than a result of Romo. Rodgers has a .500 record, but he has done it with inferior talent.

 

this statement is a cop out. Romo has had MANY key drops by receivers, and penalties, mental mistakes by teammates, at crunch time, over the last few years. so what? the same people who are arguing Romo has SO MUCH MORE TALENT AROUND HIM will say that GB's WR's are SO MUCH BETTER than Dallas' in a "best WR corp" thread.

 

Rodgers is the better QB. Rodgers will have the better career. Rodgers will win more playoff games. Romo will be a good FF quarterback, but he's not suited to win games when they matter.

 

so he's gonna do this with such poor talent around him? wow, thats such a huge obstacle to overcome. if he only had the Cowboys players.........

[donhaas 18]

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters.

 

I'm thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted you'd find at least 16 of them are Pimpdaddy..... (Vote went from 9-2 Rodgers to 18-9 Romo in a half a minute.....not one person would fess up to voting for Romo on this thread)

 

 

And, c'mon... Cowboy haters? How do you hate a team that hasn't won a playoff game in a decade and a half???

 

 

im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

 

There is no argument.... Rodgers stats dwarf Romo's and Rodgers is only a season and a half in..... he will continue to get better and better...

Any non Packer/Cowboy fan watching them play can tell that Rodgers is better than Romo.... I appreciate you as a homer sticking up for your boy, but why not save it for a battle that is closer? And there's no shame not being as good as Rodgers..... He's darn good...

[Phurfur 70]

so he's gonna do this with such poor talent around him? wow, thats such a huge obstacle to overcome. if he only had the Cowboys players.........

 

GB is rebuilding while Dallas' window is closing. HTH

[gtthom86 5]

ok, some of you are ridiculous.

 

saying Romo is not in the same league as Rodgers is stupid. really, what has Rodgers done? he's having a very good year, but to say he's >>>>>>>>than Romo is just false.

 

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters. im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

 

 

I'm not a fan of either the cowboys or the packers. But anyone that has been around football for a while, understands the QB position, and watches the games, there really is no comparison to be made.

 

Rodgers, who was a good QB last year, has become an elite talent. He is one of the best QBs in the league - its that simple. He elevates the talent around him and rarely makes a bad decision. Excluding any black QB, this guy has the best mobility in the league and I think can throw on the run better than anyone else. He is a prototypical talent and all you can ask for in a QB.

 

Romo is an undrafted success story who has turned himself into a good QB. He has mobility is great as his his arm. He is surrounded by talent, including an awesome O-line. He still makes poor decisions, but has eyes for the big play and can get his play makers the ball.

 

But, saying Romo is in the same league as rodgers, thats whats stupid. I give romo a lot of credit, especially as a fan of an NFL team that can't find a QB to save their franchise, but it really is night and day. there really is no argument to be made, regardless of win/loss record which is heavily influenced not only by talent on offense but really about how good your D is. Dallas just has the ability to go out and get top talent at every position like few other NFL teams can do.

 

Rodgers > Romo. fact, fantasy as well as real life. especially real life.

 

still amazed @ the raging of blue star wrecking crew tbh. i'm not on the message board enough but the ass out retardedness of his logic and arguments is laughable to me. I seriously think his small life would be complete sucking romo's ######. but, i digress...

[Houston Texans 10]

QUOTE(Houston Texans)

Bro, how is a QB who's never even won a playoff game better than anyone? How is a QB who has never had a winning record when it counts (December & playoffs) not bottom five? Tony Homo is Ryan Leaf, except he has a lot of talent around him. The guy just doesn't come through when it matters. Rodgers is money in that two minute drill. Rodgers is a top five QB.

 

way to contradict yourself. you're already annointing Rodgers. you're as bad as the guys that annointed Romo from the get go.

Read the post, moron. I was mocking the stupid statements you , er Blue star wrecking crew, was posting.

 

Romo has had outstanding numbers since he took over the starting job. so has Rodgers. but we're talking about a couple years here. you guys who say Rodgers>>>>>>>>Romo hate the Cowboys, period. disclaimer: i have no problem with saying Rodgers is better than Romo. but he's not WAY better.

Again, read the post (& thread), moron. I never said he was way better.

 

QUOTE(Houston Texans)

Romo has a better YPA (slightly), and a better winning record over the last 4 years. The winning record, however, is due more to the talent around him, rather than a result of Romo. Rodgers has a .500 record, but he has done it with inferior talent.

 

this statement is a cop out. Romo has had MANY key drops by receivers, and penalties, mental mistakes by teammates, at crunch time, over the last few years. so what? the same people who are arguing Romo has SO MUCH MORE TALENT AROUND HIM will say that GB's WR's are SO MUCH BETTER than Dallas' in a "best WR corp" thread.

 

It's not a cop out. I'm not talking about the WRs-Defense, O-line in Dallas are superior to GB. Also, Most of "Romo's" wins came from the 13-3 season, when that Dallas team was STACKED. You, er Blue star wrecking crew constantly reverts back to the "Romo has won more" line, but the fact is he isn't markedly better than Rodgers over the past 2 years, even with better talent.

 

QUOTE(Houston Texans)

Rodgers is the better QB. Rodgers will have the better career. Rodgers will win more playoff games. Romo will be a good FF quarterback, but he's not suited to win games when they matter.

 

so he's gonna do this with such poor talent around him? wow, thats such a huge obstacle to overcome. if he only had the Cowboys players.........

Yes, he is, over the course of his career. Rodgers is more talented than Romo, and Romo chokes when it's crunch time. Rodgers will have a better career, and win more playoff games.

[Sho Nuff 720]

42-25...wow, this poll did not quite work out for you did it pimp?

[jgcrawfish 232]

Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Schaub and possibly Eli are all QB's I'd rather have on my team that Romo if I were NFL GM. No debate, no questions asked. There may be more.

[gtthom86 5]

Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Schaub and possibly Eli are all QB's I'd rather have on my team that Romo if I were NFL GM. No debate, no questions asked. There may be more.

 

 

Yep, all of those and eli for sure. personally, I'd add carson palmer but I can see how it is debatable especially with his elbow. romo is a good QB and nothing more, thats it.

 

and by the way, anyone who takes the time to create multiple accounts on a fantasy football message board for the sake of winning arguments has a sad sad life. i hope your like 16 dude, otherwise just off yourself now and save yourself the embarrassment

[Joey Gladstone 33]

I think it's safe to say that as of now, Rodgers=Romo.

 

Since Rodgers has only been starting since 2008, and Romo has been a starting QB since the 2006 season, you can't quite give Rodgers a "choker" label. If he goes another couple seasons without a playoff win and a terrible record in "big" late-season games the label may apply.

 

Both guys are nice fantasy QBs who have done nothing in the league other then putting up stats. This is only Rodger's 2nd chance at the postseason, so we'll see how things shake out.

[Sho Nuff 720]

ok, some of you are ridiculous.

 

saying Romo is not in the same league as Rodgers is stupid. really, what has Rodgers done? he's having a very good year, but to say he's >>>>>>>>than Romo is just false.

 

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters. im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

 

2 polls...2 different boards.

The results are pretty overwhelming in favor of Rodgers.

I guess the world must all just hate the Cowboys right?

[PsychoBelichickFan 0]

ok, some of you are ridiculous.

 

saying Romo is not in the same league as Rodgers is stupid. really, what has Rodgers done? he's having a very good year, but to say he's >>>>>>>>than Romo is just false.

 

im thinkin if you took a cross section of the people who voted in this you'd see a lot of Cowboys haters. im not sayin Romo's better. but you could make an argument 4 both. and depending on this years outcome, the jury is out.

correct. they are anointing a guy who has never been in the playoffs, or lead a team to a playoff win. A rookie dude who has 1.5 years under his belt as a starter.

[PsychoBelichickFan 0]

2 polls...2 different boards.

The results are pretty overwhelming in favor of Rodgers.

I guess the world must all just hate the Cowboys right?

This poll is stacked against romo. I saw like 20 rodgers votes appear last night.

[PsychoBelichickFan 0]

I think it's safe to say that as of now, Rodgers=Romo.

 

Since Rodgers has only been starting since 2008, and Romo has been a starting QB since the 2006 season, you can't quite give Rodgers a "choker" label. If he goes another couple seasons without a playoff win and a terrible record in "big" late-season games the label may apply.

 

Both guys are nice fantasy QBs who have done nothing in the league other then putting up stats. This is only Rodger's 2nd chance at the postseason, so we'll see how things shake out.

wow. I actually agree with curly gladstone here.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

wow. I actually agree with curly gladstone here.

 

You're still a focking doosh alias.

[49ers_suck 0]

Read the post, moron. I was mocking the stupid statements you , er Blue star wrecking crew, was posting.

Again, read the post (& thread), moron. I never said he was way better.

It's not a cop out. I'm not talking about the WRs-Defense, O-line in Dallas are superior to GB. Also, Most of "Romo's" wins came from the 13-3 season, when that Dallas team was STACKED. You, er Blue star wrecking crew constantly reverts back to the "Romo has won more" line, but the fact is he isn't markedly better than Rodgers over the past 2 years, even with better talent.

Yes, he is, over the course of his career. Rodgers is more talented than Romo, and Romo chokes when it's crunch time. Rodgers will have a better career, and win more playoff games.

wow, i stand corrected. idiot

[49ers_suck 0]

2 polls...2 different boards.

The results are pretty overwhelming in favor of Rodgers.

I guess the world must all just hate the Cowboys right?

you think you get a good cross section in a poll like this? you get a few Cowboys fans and a bunch of guys chompin at the bit to rip on the Cowboys.

 

does this poll mean anything? NO

 

the funny thing is, if the Cowboys win a playoff game and GB doesnt, Rodgers will still be better cause he has a lesser team. theres your easy cop out.

 

so what is it? do the Cowboys really have all those legitimate pro-bowlers? or was the voting flawed? cant have it both ways. although, a lot of you will use it both ways, depending on the thread.