Jump to content
IGNORED

Favorite NFL Team


tiger187126
Note: This thread is 4277 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Originally Posted by meenman

Toomer needs to be drug tested - there are a few QBs out there that were great without a title - but they managed to win one later in their careers (elway comes to mind even though i always disliked him)

Romo is an average QB at best until he does something to prove otherwise - and with Jerry Jones as him GM, he is not likely to get that opportunity.

maybe its not too late for toomer to hop on that concussion class action suit, bc obviously he has major cognitive deficits.  this is a qb driven league.  year in and year out romo has had more weapns at WR, and has done NOTHING with them.  great qbs win with the talent they're given.

maybe toomer forgot the all important question: which of the two qbs testicles shrink like raisins when the $ is on the line?  romo's.  1-3 career playoff record vs 8-3 career playoff record to include 6 wins away from home, and 2 RINGS... who would you choose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yeah, because Giants D= Cowboys D

Giants RBs = Cowboys RBs

Neither Eli nor Tony are Peytons. Romo has consistently performed. The Giants are just better than the Cowboys.

But of course, the New York Eli's have two rings so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


As a cowboys fan. For Pure talent Romo is bettter. However Eli has got the rings. Plus Eli has done it with average teams. I'll take Eli over his brother every day of the week.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


... you think Eli is better than Peyton?

To those that think stats are what makes a great QB, maybe not. But in the end Eli will be the better Manning in the history books.

Follow me on twitter

Chris, although my friends call me Mr.L

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by meenman

To those that think stats are what makes a great QB, maybe not. But in the end Eli will be the better Manning in the history books.

i honestly don't think any rational, unbiased football fan can argue with this.  two stats matter: wins and loses when the chips are stacked the highest...period.

the giants won this year with a defense that was essentially held together like scotch tape an bubble gum patching a busted levee.  the MAIN reason they won was because of clutch play form eli.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by ZigZag

Peyton has stacked teams. Only won 1 superbowl

Eli had average teams has won 2 superbowls

That's the worst possible argument you could have made.

Colts got the worst record last year without Peyton, while with him they have been perennial contenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Infamous 273

i honestly don't think any rational, unbiased football fan can argue with this.  two stats matter: wins and loses when the chips are stacked the highest...period.

the giants won this year with a defense that was essentially held together like scotch tape an bubble gum patching a busted levee.  the MAIN reason they won was because of clutch play form eli.

Yeah, Peyton hasn't just been a hof lock for years now.

To say that your irrational argument is the most rational... by the definition of irrationality, it makes no sense to compare team stats to analyse how good an individual is. None whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Kapanda

Yeah, Peyton hasn't just been a hof lock for years now.

To say that your irrational argument is the most rational... by the definition of irrationality, it makes no sense to compare team stats to analyse how good an individual is. None whatsoever.

really?  then why did you say, " Colts got the worst record last year without Peyton, while with him they have been perennial contenders." isn't a teams W-L record a team stat?  i'll let you bow out of this discussion now if you would like, or you can keep contradicting yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Kapanda

That's the worst possible argument you could have made.

Colts got the worst record last year without Peyton, while with him they have been perennial contenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Infamous 273

really?  then why did you say, "Colts got the worst record last year without Peyton, while with him they have been perennial contenders."  isn't a teams W-L record a team stat?  i'll let you bow out of this discussion now if you would like, or you can keep contradicting yourself.

uhh.. context??!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have both Romo and Eli in my top 5 with Brady Rodgers and Brees. I Can't rate Peyton atm due to his neck. Once he plays and will likely play well he would slide in the top 5 for Tony.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The problem with what Toomer said was his conclusion, not his facts.  He said "For me, if I wanted a guy that is going to throw less interceptions, (be) more productive, higher completion percentage, I'm going to go with Tony Romo," said Toomer, apparently ignoring the fact Manning delivered him his only Super Bowl ring in 2008. "At crunch time, he's not as good as Eli, but every other time, he's pretty darn good."

That is completely true.  No doubt that Romo can put up better overall stats for the regular season.  But, there is also no doubt that when the chips have been down, Eli has come through an Romo has not.  Romo misses an open receiver to ice the game - Eli puts the ball right on the money in a very tight spot to get the game winning drive off and running.  Yes Romo has the  better stats,  But do you want stats or do you want money in the clutch?

It is also a fact that in the playoffs Romo's stats have not lived up to his pre-season stats.  His Passer Rating in the playoffs is only around 80 - well BELOW his regular season rating.  Eli on the other hand has elevated his play in the playoffs.  His overall playoff Passer Rating is around 89, well ABOVE his overall passer rating.  In 2011 his regular season passer rating was 92.9 but it was 103.3 in the playoffs.  In 2007 is regular season passer rating was 73.9 but his playoff passer rating was 95.7.

One last thing about stats that should be very telling to Cowboy fans.  Troy Aikman was the very essence of a QB who did not put up spectacular stats in the regular season (81.6 career passer rating) but who consistently came up big in the playoffs and led his team to championships.  Eli is the functional successor to Aikman.  IN almost every case Aikman's post-season passer rating was better than his regular season passer rating.  Just like Eli.  Romo has never had that happen.  His passer rating for the playoffs has always been less than his regular season passer rating.

If you want a QB for your fantasy football team by all means pick Romo.  If you want one for a real football team to play real football in the NFL, go with Eli.

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by turtleback

The problem with what Toomer said was his conclusion, not his facts.  He said "For me, if I wanted a guy that is going to throw less interceptions, (be) more productive, higher completion percentage, I'm going to go with Tony Romo," said Toomer, apparently ignoring the fact Manning delivered him his only Super Bowl ring in 2008. "At crunch time, he's not as good as Eli, but every other time, he's pretty darn good."

That is completely true.  No doubt that Romo can put up better overall stats for the regular season.  But, there is also no doubt that when the chips have been down, Eli has come through an Romo has not.  Romo misses an open receiver to ice the game - Eli puts the ball right on the money in a very tight spot to get the game winning drive off and running.  Yes Romo has the  better stats,  But do you want stats or do you want money in the clutch?

It is also a fact that in the playoffs Romo's stats have not lived up to his pre-season stats.  His Passer Rating in the playoffs is only around 80 - well BELOW his regular season rating.  Eli on the other hand has elevated his play in the playoffs.  His overall playoff Passer Rating is around 89, well ABOVE his overall passer rating.  In 2011 his regular season passer rating was 92.9 but it was 103.3 in the playoffs.  In 2007 is regular season passer rating was 73.9 but his playoff passer rating was 95.7.

One last thing about stats that should be very telling to Cowboy fans.  Troy Aikman was the very essence of a QB who did not put up spectacular stats in the regular season (81.6 career passer rating) but who consistently came up big in the playoffs and led his team to championships.  Eli is the functional successor to Aikman.  IN almost every case Aikman's post-season passer rating was better than his regular season passer rating.  Just like Eli.  Romo has never had that happen.  His passer rating for the playoffs has always been less than his regular season passer rating.

If you want a QB for your fantasy football team by all means pick Romo.  If you want one for a real football team to play real football in the NFL, go with Eli.

Reasonable pov, though I disagree. My personal opinion, the "clutch" factor is overrated, and it is probably valued more by commercial commentators and fans than by talent evaluators. Simply because it is too situation-specific, and it is too hard to sincerely tell how much of it is down to a player's innate "clutch" ability, and how much is down to either it simply being one of many bad plays (which every player of every caliber has), or a lot of times just terrible luck.

I can accept your argument, but stats are much better at evaluating talent. And talent is really and truly what counts. The better player is measured by what his performance ability is like, and a handful of plays cannot show that. Granted, stats are nowhere near the be all and end all, much more important is actual tape. I just disagree with fans who put such a premium on clutch. It's too superficial a trait to consider, unless everything else is identical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by turtleback

+1

Born and raised a Giants fan.  An obsessive one.  But I disagree about the weak NFC East.  I think it is as strong as any division in the league.  And our upcoming out of division schedule is a beast.  Ironically we have the toughest upcoming schedule and our vanquished foes from New England have one of the easiest.  But that is OK, we'll be battle-hardened when the playoffs come.  And we came out strong after the 2007 championship until a certain WR who will remain nameless ruined the season by shooting himself.

Do you participate in any NY Giants discussion board?  I do a couple of them.

Originally Posted by meenman

The Super Bowl Champion NY Giants. Of course this team generally does not do well when expectations are high, but with a weak NFC East, we have a shot at breaking that trend.

Good to see Big Blue fans across the country.

Born and raised in NY. Suffered through Tarkenton and Pisarcik years. Revelled in the years of the Enigma (Parcells).

Every year Big Blue is underated while the 'Dream Team' and the star-studded Cowgirls get accolades, and this coming year should be no different.  I think the fact that Eli is finally good at moving and reacting in the pocket will make it another good season for the Gmen.

dak4n6

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Cowboys will win the NFC East. Eagles will be a wildcard team imo. Love our new CB's. Just Hope they stay healthy. I have one huge issue with the cowboys. Jason Garrett.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 4277 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Makes sense.  Like I said, I wouldn't have been upset at their original offer either, and based on the fine print it seems like they've held up their end of the deal.  
    • If you've only had to adjust retroactively one time in 8 years and have around 5 people each year without handicaps, that's like 40-50 people total so it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job. I think your questions give enough to go off of. This might be a good way to get new people to actually post a few scores during the 6 weeks leading into the first event. Something like "New members will be eligible for tournament money once they have at least 3 posted rounds in GHIN" or something like that. If they can get 3 rounds in prior to their first event, then they're eligible. If not, they'll soon become eligible after an event or two assuming they play a little bit outside of events.
    • This is a loooooong winded narrative so if you don't like long stories, move on. 😉 Our senior club typically gets about 25 new members each year. We lose about 25 members each year for various reasons (moved to FL/AZ, disabled, dead, too expensive). Of the new members, usually 20 have an active GHIN handicap. About 5 each year do not have a GHIN handicap. When they join our club, we give each member a state association membership that includes GHIN handicapping services. We play a series of handicapped tournaments over the summer. When we sign up a new member who does not have a GHIN handicap, we attempt to give them an estimated index until they have sufficient scores posted to have an actual GHIN index.  Our first event typically is around May 15 so, in theory, a new member has about 6 weeks to post a few scores. Posting season in the Mitten starts April 1. Inevitably, several of the unhandicapped individuals seem  to either not play until the first tournament or can't figure out how to enter scores (hey, they are seniors). That situation then leads to my contacting the new member and asking a series of questions: a. Did you ever have a GHIN handicap? If yes, which State and do you recall what it was? b. Do you have an alternate handicap through a non-GHIN handicap service or a league? c. What do you think your average score was last year (for 9 or 18) d. What was your best score last year? Where did you play and which tee was used? e. What do you consider a very good score for yourself? Based on their responses I attempt to give them an index that makes them competitive in the first couple events BUT does not allow them to win their flight in the first couple events. We don't want the new members to finish last and at the same time, we don't want someone with a "20" playing handicap to win the third flight with a net 57. In the event some new member did shoot a net 57, we also advise everyone that we can and will adjust handicaps retroactively when it is clear to us that a member's handicap does not accurately reflect their potential. We don't like to adjust things retroactively and in the 8 years I have chaired the Handicap Committee, we have only done it once. So here are the questions to the mob: Any ideas how to do this better? Any questions one might ask an unhandicapped individual to better estimate their index/handicap? Would it be reasonable to have a new player play once (or more?) without being eligible to place in the money?
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Awesome! I got that a while back with my start word! Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...