Eli Manning

[ssbriefcase]

Who? Eli was the QB that made the big plays - and guys like Farve didn't.

Whatya mean who? Elisha Manning? Super bowl rings = dumbest reason ever to name one position over another, if that's the sole reason..

 

[donniesyracuse]

While I may have a Silverado, I'm arguing for the north here... confused by the reference!

I was suggesting that your grammar makes you sound like Southern trash. It was mean and uncalled-for though; I apologize.

 

[Briancuse]

Who in their right mind would want to play for that chargers team at the time. Just like the discussion we are having now: if you have the power you control it.

Ya who wants to live in San Diego, and play for a team that was a perennial playoff teams for quite a few years.

 

[Briancuse]

Eli is 100% in super bowls, Romo is 0%.

And, I feel my grammar fits the discussion just fine!

Eli has also been on some better teams.

 

[cuseattle]

I will still take Kelly over Marino. Then again, as a Bills fan, there is no changing my mind in spite of any statistic you can show me.

 

[orange79]

That is so exaggerated. Romo was 4 - 0 in December last year. He also has 24 career 4th quarter comebacks. I think that is two fewer than Manning, and Romo has started about 40 fewer games.

Good for him. And all those great comebacks - how many SB appearances has it got him? This is silly - anything one side says can be 'refuted' by the other. Is Romo Jamarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf? No. Is he a Top 5 QB? No, Is he a Top 10 QB? Not IMO. We have to downplay (not ignore) the 'played on good/bad teams' thing. That is not under the QB's control. Are completions good? Sure. Are comebacks good? Sure. Are wins in December good? Sure. But wins in January and February are better. Way better. And on that point, Romo doesn't measure up.

 

[donniesyracuse]

Good for him. And all those great comebacks - how many SB appearances has it got him? This is silly - anything one side says can be 'refuted' by the other. Is Romo Jamarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf? No. Is he a Top 5 QB? No, Is he a Top 10 QB? Not IMO. We have to downplay (not ignore) the 'played on good/bad teams' thing. That is not under the QB's control. Are completions good? Sure. Are comebacks good? Sure. Are wins in December good? Sure. But wins in January and February are better. Way better. And on that point, Romo doesn't measure up.

Measure up to what? It's pathetic that Giant fans cannot acknowledge that he is a good quarterback. It's like you think you're cheating on Eli if you admit it. Grow up!

 

[Melancer46]

It really blows my mind when knowledgeable football people rely solely on wins as the barometer of a good player. Sure, QBs have the biggest impact relative to other positions, but he's still one of 22 guys that are on the field at a time. Romo has a stronger arm than Eli. Romo is more accurate than Eli. Romo throws TDs more often. Romo throws INTs less often. Romo picks up more yards on a per pass basis. Romo is more mobile. Their postseason stats are nearly identical, with Romo beating Eli slightly in basically every category. The only difference in terms of postseason is that Eli's defenses have been significantly better.

Would anyone actually argue that Eli is a better postseason QB than someone like Rodgers simply because his team has won two Super Bowls despite Rodgers being FAR better both in the regular season and the playoffs? Going strictly based on wins to determine how good an individual player is is just so outdated IMO. Football is far too complicated a sport to narrow it down to one thing that an individual player has so little an impact on.

 

[donniesyracuse]

The "rings are all that matters" argument reflects an inability to recognize nuance. It is basically a child's argument.

 

[Alsacs]

It really blows my mind when knowledgeable football people rely solely on wins as the barometer of a good player. Sure, QBs have the biggest impact relative to other positions, but he's still one of 22 guys that are on the field at a time. Romo has a stronger arm than Eli. Romo is more accurate than Eli. Romo throws TDs more often. Romo throws INTs less often. Romo gets sacked less often. Romo picks up more yards on a per pass basis. Romo is more mobile. Their postseason stats are nearly identical, with Romo beating Eli slightly in basically every category. The only difference in terms of postseason is that Eli's defenses have been significantly better.

Would anyone actually argue that Eli is a better postseason QB than someone like Rodgers simply because his team has won two Super Bowls despite Rodgers being FAR better both in the regular season and the playoffs? Going strictly based on wins to determine how good an individual player is is just so outdated IMO. Football is far too complicated a sport to narrow it down to one thing that an individual player has so little an impact on.

My stats have shown Rodgers is better than Eli. He has a higher winning% and has made the playoffs 6 times in 7 years as the starting QB that is more appearances than Eli has in his career.
Romo IMO is not better than Eli. Both in the upper middle of the league QB rankings IMO. Romo has never won a road playoff game 0-3. Eli has gotten hot 2 times in the playoffs and while his D helped him SB 42 they don't get to that SB without him playing well @ TB, @ Dal, @ GB.
Romo is better decision maker than Eli but I mean wins are fair to judge a QB because in team sports the QB has the biggest impact on a team's ability to win games.

 

[orange79]

Measure up to what? It's pathetic that Giant fans cannot acknowledge that he is a good quarterback. It's like you think you're cheating on Eli if you admit it. Grow up!

Oh, please. You sound like a jealous butt-hurt Cowboys fan. Are you? I said he's not a great QB. I said he's not a Top 10 QB, in my opinion. Is he Top 15 - yeah probably. Does that make him a good QB? Depends on you definition. It definitely puts him in the top 50th percentile. Is that good? If so, then I did 'acknowledge that he is a good quarterback' . Is that pathetic? I'll grow up when I want, thank you. But not worshiping at the altar of the great Tony Romo is not immaturity. It's intelligence.

 

[donniesyracuse]

Oh, please. You sound like a jealous butt-hurt Cowboys fan. Are you? I said he's not a great QB. I said he's not a Top 10 QB, in my opinion. Is he Top 15 - yeah probably. Does that make him a good QB? Depends on you definition. It definitely puts him in the top 50th percentile. Is that good? If so, then I did 'acknowledge that he is a good quarterback' . Is that pathetic? I'll grow up when I want, thank you. But not worshiping at the altar of the great Tony Romo is not immaturity. It's intelligence.

nobody asked you to worship. You said he never accomplished anything, which by most measures is completely false.

 

[orange79]

nobody asked you to worship. You said he never accomplished anything, which by most measures is completely false.

Great - if you would rather have a QB who compiles stats instead of winning championships, fine. Have at it. Because in my opinion, that's all he has done. Compile stats. Nothing wrong with that, just not my cup of tea. Hey, great QB's are not a dime a dozen.

Done now.

 

[Melancer46]

My stats have shown Rodgers is better than Eli. He has a higher winning% and has made the playoffs 6 times in 7 years as the starting QB that is more appearances than Eli has in his career.
Romo IMO is not better than Eli. Both in the upper middle of the league QB rankings IMO. Romo has never won a road playoff game 0-3. Eli has gotten hot 2 times in the playoffs and while his D helped him SB 42 they don't get to that SB without him playing well @ TB, @ Dal, @ GB.
Romo is better decision maker than Eli but I mean wins are fair to judge a QB because in team sports the QB has the biggest impact on a team's ability to win games.

My thing is what exactly is that impact? How much of what they do is impacted by what their offensive line, receivers, and running backs do? And then they aren't even on the field for half the game. It's impossible to actually quantify how much of an impact a QB has on the actual end result. They definitely have the biggest impact relative to the other positions, but it's still not nearly a big enough impact to use wins as the biggest barometer of what makes the individual QB good.

At the end of the day, between the numbers and the eye test, Romo has Eli beaten in basically every way IMO. I'm not sure there's really an argument to be made for Eli besides just the "his team has won more in the playoffs", but even then, Eli's offenses have scored fewer points in the postseason than Romo's (obviously far more goes into scoring points than simply whose offense performed better, but I don't have the time to dive into every possession of every postseason game lol). The difference is that Eli's defenses have given up a full touchdown less.

And regarding your reasoning for why Rodgers is better than Eli, Romo also has a higher winning % too and has had a winning record as the starting QB 8 out of 9 years, versus 8 out of 11 years for Eli.

 

[Alsacs]

My thing is what exactly is that impact? How much of what they do is impacted by what their offensive line, receivers, and running backs do? And then they aren't even on the field for half the game. It's impossible to actually quantify how much of an impact a QB has on the actual end result. They definitely have the biggest impact relative to the other positions, but it's still not nearly a big enough impact to use wins as the biggest barometer of what makes the individual QB good.

At the end of the day, between the numbers and the eye test, Romo has Eli beaten in basically every way IMO. I'm not sure there's really an argument to be made for Eli besides just the "his team has won more in the playoffs", but even then, Eli's offenses have scored fewer points in the postseason than Romo's (obviously far more goes into scoring points than simply whose offense performed better, but I don't have the time to dive into every possession of every postseason game lol). The difference is that Eli's defenses have given up a full touchdown less.

And regarding your reasoning for why Rodgers is better than Eli, Romo also has a higher winning % too and has had a winning record as the starting QB 8 out of 9 years, versus 8 out of 11 years for Eli.

I believe Dallas has had more talent but until last year I believe they had gone 8-8 for like 3 years in a row. Romo has crapped his bed in bigger spots more than Eli. Now I believe Eli isn't that good he has justed upped his game 2 postseasons and that matters a lot when you get the rings. Romo at Washington 2012/NY Giants 2011/Philadelphia 2008 week 17 those losses stick out.

Now Romo has been good, but he hasn't built up postseason currency. Postseason currency carries more weight.

 

[orange79]

My thing is what exactly is that impact? How much of what they do is impacted by what their offensive line, receivers, and running backs do? And then they aren't even on the field for half the game. It's impossible to actually quantify how much of an impact a QB has on the actual end result. They definitely have the biggest impact relative to the other positions, but it's still not nearly a big enough impact to use wins as the biggest barometer of what makes the individual QB good.

At the end of the day, between the numbers and the eye test, Romo has Eli beaten in basically every way IMO. I'm not sure there's really an argument to be made for Eli besides just the "his team has won more in the playoffs", but even then, Eli's offenses have scored fewer points in the postseason than Romo's (obviously far more goes into scoring points than simply whose offense performed better, but I don't have the time to dive into every possession of every postseason game lol). The difference is that Eli's defenses have given up a full touchdown less.

And regarding your reasoning for why Rodgers is better than Eli, Romo also has a higher winning % too and has had a winning record as the starting QB 8 out of 9 years, versus 8 out of 11 years for Eli.

I had to go and check this. And you are right! On average, in Romo's 6 post-season appearances, the Pokes have averaged 19.833 points per game. In Eli's 11 appearances (did I mention he has won 2 SB's, MVP each time?), the NYFG's have averaged 19.818 points per game. So Romo has bettered Eli by 0.015 points per game. Not trying to be snarky, I was just surprised it was that close.

 

[Melancer46]

I had to go and check this. And you are right! On average, in Romo's 6 post-season appearances, the Pokes have averaged 19.833 points per game. In Eli's 11 appearances (did I mention he has won 2 SB's, MVP each time?), the NYFG's have averaged 19.818 points per game. So Romo has bettered Eli by 0.015 points per game. Not trying to be snarky, I was just surprised it was that close.

Yeah, and like I said, if I had all the time in the world, I'd look into starting field position, strength of the opponent's defense, whether any of these points were scored by the defenses, etc., but I don't. And even then, you could make the case that it's sometimes a part of the gameplan to not really try to score too much (ex: trying to slow the game down to keep it close with the Patriots juggernaut offense that one year). It's just so difficult to assign credit/blame to the end result of a football game IMO.

 

[orange79]

Yeah, and like I said, if I had all the time in the world, I'd look into starting field position, strength of the opponent's defense, whether any of these points were scored by the defenses, etc., but I don't. And even then, you could make the case that it's sometimes a part of the gameplan to not really try to score too much (ex: trying to slow the game down to keep it close with the Patriots juggernaut offense that one year). It's just so difficult to assign credit/blame to the end result of a football game IMO.

Agreed

 

[donniesyracuse]

Alright, I think we have gone in circles enough.

Here is a new question: whom do you predict will be the better quarterback this season?

My money is on Romo, of course.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I realize Romo has been terrible in some big spots, but I think Eli has played with much better defensive talent through the course of his career than Romo has.
Also, I don't think Eli is a bad quarterback, but he shouldn't be paid the most money out of all of them.

 

[Knicks411]

So I tried to read this whole thread: just nope.

 

[retro44]

Nonsense! Jeff Hostetler and Mark Rypien were way better than Jim Kelly.

Hell,even McNabb has better lifetime numbers than Kelly

 

[Alsacs]

So I tried to read this whole thread: just nope.

Are you a Jets fan or. Giants fan?

 

[Briancuse]

Measure up to what? It's pathetic that Giant fans cannot acknowledge that he is a good quarterback. It's like you think you're cheating on Eli if you admit it. Grow up!

Its funny how its only Giants fans that can't acknowledge how good he is

 

[Briancuse]

Good for him. And all those great comebacks - how many SB appearances has it got him? This is silly - anything one side says can be 'refuted' by the other. Is Romo Jamarcus Russell or Ryan Leaf? No. Is he a Top 5 QB? No, Is he a Top 10 QB? Not IMO. We have to downplay (not ignore) the 'played on good/bad teams' thing. That is not under the QB's control. Are completions good? Sure. Are comebacks good? Sure. Are wins in December good? Sure. But wins in January and February are better. Way better. And on that point, Romo doesn't measure up.

Name me 9 better qbs right now.