Behind the Steel Curtain: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Cottagers Confidential for Fulham FC Fans!

Romo vs. Garrard vs. Ben(please)

Well, we have had a Terry sighting, something that hasn't happened in a long time.  Much debate has been made about Romo, Ben and David Garrard in another post, so I thought that I would put most of the information in one place.

In comparing Romo and Garrard, there really isn't too much of a comparison, as Romo beat Garrard in almost every category last year, Garrard's only full season as starter.  Since Garrard has only started one season, it seemed fair to compare the two just for last season...

Romo - 520 att, 335 comp, 64.4%, 4211 yds, 8.1 avg, 36 TD's and 6.9 TD%, 19 ints, and a 97.4 rating.

Garrard - 325 att, 208 comp, 64%, 2509 yds, 7.72 avg, 18 TDs, 5.5 TD%, 3 ints, and a 102.2 rating.

There is something to be said about the fact that Romo has better recievers and the Jags run a LOT.  However, that doesn't explain away the comp. percentage, average yds per pass and the TD percentage.  Those 3 stats are a bit more important to me, since it shows how consistent they are, and Romo is better in all three.  The 3 ints are an amazing stat, and finishing with a rating over 100, something which Romo has not done in 2 seasons as a starter, is quite an accomplishment.  All in all, the two are fairly similar in the regular season.  You can't really argue strongly for either one being 'better'.

Postseason-wise, Romo is 0-2, compared to Garrard who is 1-1.  Both guys have been in 2 playoff games, and the lines are as follows:

Romo

vs. Seattle - 36 att, 18 comp, 50% comp, 201 yds, 5.58 avg, 1 Td, 1 int, for a 89.6 rating.

vs. NYG - 29 att, 17 comp, 58% comp, 1889 yds, 6.52 avg, 1 TD, 0 int, for a dismal 64.7 rating.

Garrard

vs. Pitt - 21 att, 9 comp, 42% comp, 140 yds, 8.02 avg, 2 Tds, 3 ints, 79.2 rating.

vs. NE - 33 att, 22 comp, 66% comp, 278 yds, 8.42 avg, 2 TD, 0 ints, 100.3 rating.

Take what you will from that, to me it looks as though there isn't too much difference, neither qb has done much in the postseason, although Garrard's line in the NE loss is very good.

As for the claim that Romo is better than Ben...

Romo's first season as a starter -
337 att, 220 comp, 65.3% 2903yds, 8.61 avg, 19 TDs, 5.6 TD%, 13 ints, and a 95.1 rating.  Record was 6-4.

Ben's first season - 295 att, 196 comp, 66.4 comp%, 2621 yds, 8.88 avg, 17 TDs, 5.8 TD%, 11 ints, and a 98.1 rating.  Record was 14-0.

So first season comparison is a joke.  Romo barely cleared .500 winning percentage, Ben set a rookie record for winning his first 13 games as a starter.  13 - 0!  Amazing first year run.  

Playoff records -
Romo is 0-2
Ben is 5-2, 2 AFC championship games, 1 SB ring

Defining playoff moments -
Romo - botching a hold for a game winning field goal.
Ben - game-saving tackle on a fumble return.

Say what you want about that terrible performance in the superbowl, they still won, and it was one playoff game.  Ben still has a ring and 5 playoff wins.

Regular season winning percentage -
Romo: 19 - 7 for a .730%
Ben: 40 - 16 for a .713%
pretty even, considering that Ben had one monster bad season, and has been in the league longer.

Overall career stats -
Ben - 55 games started, 1437 att, 909 comp, 63.3 comp%, 11677 yds,  8.13 avg, 84 TDs, 5.8 TD%, 54 ints, for a rating of 92.5

Romo - 26 games started, 857 att, 555 comp, 64.8 comp%, 7114yds, 8.30 avg, 55 TDs, 6.4 TD%, 32 ints, and a rating of 96.5

Bens records:

1 Pro Bowl
Most wins by a rookie - 13 games
Highest qb rating for a rookie - 98.1
Longest win streak to start a career - 15 games
Best won-loss record thru 4 years for a qb - 44 and 18
First qb to start two AFC championship games in his first two seasons.
Youngest qb to start the superbowl
Highest comp% for a rookie qb - 66.4%
Oh yeah,
and worst rating for a winning superbowl qb - 22.7

Romo's records -
2 Pro Bowls

One more interesting stat - Ben has 3 career perfect passer rating games.  Since it's inception, there have only been 40 perfect ratings, thrown by 34 qbs.  The only other multiples are Peyton(four) and Kurt Warner(two).  Oh yeah, Romo has a big goose egg.

When comparing these stats, you have to look at the fact that the Steelers do run a predominantly run first offense, and that the Cowboys have had more talent at the reciever position.  I think that those two facts are changing though.  I think we will get more and more balanced and that Holmes will get more talented.  But comparing Owens and even my man-crush Hines, Owens is by far the better reciever.  Pure talent wise, may be the best in the league, and he doesn't seem to be slowing down with age.  Hines does a little bit.

Terry, your comments like

"Romo is being paid as much or less than most franchise QBs including your boy Ben, who by the way has a less than impressive resume than Romo unless you want to count that SB win which was won in spite of his horrendous performance that day (25 qb rating, worse ever for a winning SB QB)."

are waaaay off base, not to mention grammatically incorrect.  Their actual stats are pretty similar, but their actual RESUMES don't compare.  Ben set multiple rookie records, has a better playoff record, a similar regular season record, 3 perfect passer ratings, nearly the same amount of Pro Bowls, two AFC champ appearances and a superbowl win.  Romo has a tiny better winning percentage, and two playoff losses.

And last but not least you made this comment:

"Romo doesn't draw attention to himself, he's automatically going to get tons of attention no matter what he does because he's the QB of the Dallas Cowboys. Whoever that person is, they are going to be viewed under a microscope 24/7, thats just the way it is."

So, did Bledsoe draw the kind of attention that Romeo has drawn for himself?  What about Henson, Wright, Carter,  and Testaverde?  All of these guys were starting qbs for the Boys in this decade and none of them made the tabloids on a regular basis.  Just because you are a qb for the self-proclaimed "America's Team" does not mean you are under the media's microscope.  The Cowboys are not what they once were, despite what so many of their fans want to think.  Hell, the biggest news for your team this decade has been the hiring of a troubled reciever, the hiring and subsequent quitting of a primmadonna coach, and a playboy qb having girlfriend issues.

0 recs  |  Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Terry
Great post, steelerark!

In reading Terry's arguments in the other diary, I was amazed at how weak his arguments have been, and this post just totally destroyed his arguments.  The reason for this is that unlike regular contributors to this site, who have realistic views of our team's situation, Terry seems convinced that Tony Romo is already guaranteed to win multiple SBs, despite Tony's poor to mediocre post season performances thus far in his career.  

Perhaps I was off to say Romo didn't deserve what he got in his contract, but at the time that he got it, he was just then nearing a full season as a starter.  A much more reasonable approach would have been to sign him to a two or three year extension for around $20M, then to have given him a raise at the end of this year with a deal similar to what he actually got.  Still, you're paying him to win championships, not regular season games, and he hasn't gotten past round 1 in the playoffs.

Again, Terry assumes that he will win multiple SB's but the fact remains that he hasn't one a single playoff game.  To assert that he will before he does just shows a lack of rational thought.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 26, 2008 2:00 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Tom Brady
heck, Tom Brady only got a 4-year 30 million extension after he had already won a Super Bowl, because New England was taking the approach you suggest as he had only played just over a full year at that point.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Mar 26, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sensible ownership
Yeah, the 'boys haven't really been the same since Jimmy left, and they wouldn't be as good as they are right now without the few years of Parcells.  Jerry thinks he's football genius, but everyone really knows that Jimmy built their SB teams of the 90s.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 26, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

one thing
I had the lines from Romo's two playoff games reversed.  It should be:

vs. NYG - 36 att, 18 comp, 50% comp, 201 yds, 5.58 avg, 1 TD, 1 int, for a dismal rating of 64.7

vs. Seattle - 29 att, 17 comp, 58% comp, 189 yds, 6.52 avg, 1 TD, 0 int, for a rating of 89.6

by steelerark on Mar 26, 2008 2:21 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

nice try comparing "has beens"
and scrubs to a legitimate NFL superstar, thats really funny. Of course Bledose, Henson, Testeverde and Carter didn't draw media attention, they all sucked!!

A letigimate franchise qb for the Dallas Cowboys is like playing shortstop for the Yankees, they will AUTOMATICALLY draw media attention no matter what.

Like I said before, obviously all Steeler fans think Ben is better than Romo and all Cowboys fans think Romo is better than Ben, and in reality most teams would take either guy to QB their team. Of course I'd take Romo over Ben every day of the week and twice on Sundays, but I'm a Romosexual and I think Tony is the best.

Its all subjective and the only thing that matters is what they'll do in future years to come. I'm obviously putting my money on Romo. I do look forward to their battle at Heinz Field this season, should be a good one.

by Terry on Mar 26, 2008 5:13 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

oh man, how did i miss this???
You said, and  I quote...  "WHOEVER is that person(qb for the Cowboys) is, they are going to viewed under a microscope"  So now you are changing that?  Its not WHOEVER anymore?  Its only if you are a 'legitimate' franchise qb?  How does one define that?  Is that a draft category?  "And now, with the first pick in the 2008 NFL draft, the Miami Dolphins pick the franchise quarterback from Boston College, Matt Ryan."

by steelerark on Mar 30, 2008 2:50 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not only has Romo not won a playoff game
But when the Cowboys actually had a playoff game won, locked up and in the vault, Romo decided to Buckner a perfect snap for the game-winning field goal and defeat was taken through the jaws of victory.

It's one thing to have never won a playoff game; it's on another level when you bonehead a victory into defeat.  My 12-year old daughter would have caught that snap and held for the victory.

But enough is enough with all this Romo nonsense.  Who cares?  Let's just agree to disagree and hope we meet in the Super bowl.

by maryrose on Mar 26, 2008 5:46 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

that drop occured as a holder
not as a QB, I guess your forgetting he's the guy that got the team in position to kick the game winning FG.

I seriously doubt that either you or your daughter could receive a hold from a NFL snapper, willing to bet my paycheck on it.

BTW, a 4th Cowboys/Steelers SB would be awesome.

by Terry on Mar 26, 2008 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It is not all subjective
Ben has a successful SB run and was the second highest rated qb in the league, behind Brady.

Romo has no playoff success whatsoever. NONE!

Ben has overcome a close encounter with car windshield with aplomb.

Romo can't handle Jessica Simpson.

A 4th Cowboys/Steelers SB? Why would you want to torture yourself?

by RickVa on Mar 26, 2008 8:47 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

well, to see Romo whoop Ben of course
I think its halarious that since Ben lucked out winning a SB and now all QBs are judged soley on playoff success.

If Romo had been in the league several years, you might have a point, but to judge him on playoff success only after less than 2 seasons is ludicrious.

by Terry on Mar 26, 2008 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

been in the league how long?
Romo's been in the league 5 seasons, he's only been playing for a year and a half though.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

you don't read very well cgolden
I never said he was in the league less than 2 years, but only playing for less than 2 years, which is what matters.

Like I said, if he was the starting qb for several years, everyone's argument regarding playoff success would hold water, but judging a player when he hasn't played even 2 full seasons yet is simply not a fair indication of his ability or talent.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

by the same token Terry
you can't say he's a top 3 QB.  if you're saying we can't judge him after just 2 seasons negatively, you can't judge him the other way and say "oh he's for sure going to be great" based on the same logic.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Mar 27, 2008 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I never said he will be great
I said he IS great and 2 playoff games in which he didn't play poorly doesn't change that at all.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe he didn't play poorly
but his number in those two playoff games were significantly below his regular season numbers.  That was all everybody else's fault on the team?

Also, GREAT players overcome poor performances to win games.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 27, 2008 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Congrats on his regular season greatness then
Glad to see you're satisfied with the "just wait to next year" battle cry.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

These are you're exact words?
If Romo had been in the league several years, you might have a point, but to judge him on playoff success only after less than 2 seasons is ludicrious.

Is five years not more than several?

Fact is, he's being paid like a franchise quarterback now. It doesn't matter now that he wasn't drafted or that he's only started 26 games. He's being paid 10 million a year and he needs to play like it otherwise he'll fall in with the Marc Bulgers of the world in my mind. Romo still has plenty of time to prove his worth in the playoffs and he should get numerous opportunities over the next several years but for right now he's a playoff failure and any speculation about future sucess is nothing more wishful thinking.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Terry is hilarious :)
So Romo can't be blamed for anything bad that happened in the playoffs.  His poor numbers in playoff play relative to regular season play are all the fault of his receivers and O-Line.  Although he couldn't carry his team to victory for the last two years in the playoffs, he's guaranteed to be the next great QB of the league.

Terry, your arguments have no coherence.  Reading your responses here have provided me with great entertainment, because you're so obviously delusional. :)

If you want to seem reasonable, just say that your glad he's your QB.  He has let you down in the playoffs so far, but he's still relatively young so you have reason to be hopeful.  Any outside observer (not a fan of either team) would say that Ben has a more accomplished resume at this point in time, he had more accomplished resume after two years as a starter, and he's two years younger, so he still has a larger window of opportunity.

And, yes, as little as you want to admit it, championships and playoff wins do mean something.  I just saw a little of the NFL's Greatest Games yesterday, and it was about SB XIII (I'm sure you have fond memories of that:)).  Roger Staubach was lamenting that more Cowboys would probably have been HOFers if they had won that game.  So, obviously history remembers the Steelers of the 70s as greater than the Cowboys of the 70s.  And, more Steelers made the HOF because they had 2 more SBs than the Cowboys.  That's just how it is.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 27, 2008 10:41 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

+1
Someone seems a little drunk on the blue and gray Kool-Aid.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd like to put this guy in a room with wiggins.
I think it'd be fun to watch, until my head explodes out of confusion.

by HinesField on Mar 27, 2008 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ohh, Silver
How fitting, a second place color. Thanks for correcting my mistake.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

lol..thats funny
I wouldn't be making fun of colors if I were a Steeler fan, that mustard yellow is about as ugly as colors get.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Black and Gold
Say what you want about the Black and Gold but I'll take out our colors over blue and silver any day.

by cgolden on Mar 27, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Black and Yellow
you Steeler fans crack me up when you call that putrid yellow gold, I got news for you, its not gold, its yellow in case you're all colorblind.

Notre Dame, current Rams, Pitt, Colorado, Saints, those teams are gold, the Steelers colors are black and yellow and they hidious.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Romo didn't let me down at all
I'm not saying he played awesome, but he's certainly not repsonsible for those playoff losses from the qb position. He definitely played well enough to win, that for sure. I really don't know how its possible for a qb to overcome drops and poor routes by receivers and poor blocking by the OL. He's great, but he's also human.

Just ask Peyton Manning about supporting casts, he was in the exact same sitauation in his playoff loss to the Chargers and didn't overcome his teammates poor performance. So I guess Manning gets a pass since he already won a SB...yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It took Manning 7 years to win a SB, but I guess he wasn't that great until 2006, huh?

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You said IS great now
He is the one who threw the interception to clinch the loss to the Giants, correct?

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 27, 2008 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excuse me
Who fumbled that field goal snap in Seattle? TO? What do you have to do to be 'responsible'?

by RickVa on Mar 27, 2008 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

But he
fumbled the snap as a holder, not as a QB!  Don't you understand that Romo can do no wrong?  He is great, I tell you, GREAT!

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 27, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

But
Terry could make the argument that Dan Marino never won a SB but was a great QB.  But my arguement back at that is Marino a year ago was holding every QB record in the NFL.  Two ways to be great, Either Win during playoff times and win many SB, or Break every record known to man for any given position.  Both of them are not easy to achieve.  I still take the SB wins over the Records.

If Brady never won a superbowl and did what he did last season, he would of been view differently like Mario is viewed against how people view Troy Aikman  (someone who doesnt have Mario like numbers but wins alot of superbowls and playoff games.)  

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on Mar 27, 2008 11:10 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Staubach wannabee
Football 101. Players (and especially) quarterbacks are not great because of hype. These Cowboys remind me of that group of underachievers that choked their way through the late 60s. What has Romo accomplished other than being the Anna K. of the NFL. You remember Anna K.? (Kornakova-(sp)) Great publicity for tennis because she was so pretty. Only one problem, she never won any damn thing. This guy can't win a JV (NFC) playoff game, is P-whipped and Terry wants to anoint him as the second coming of Johnny Unitas.

Dwight White said it best. The world is divided into three groups football wise. Those who have won more than one SB (Brady, among active players), those who have won one (Ben, Farve, Warner, Dilfer, Johnson, both Mannings) and the third group doesn't count. That includes your boy Romo. Come see us after he gets a ring.

by RickVa on Mar 27, 2008 4:27 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I really
didn't want this post to get into a pissing contest, no matter how enjoyable it has been to read.  The main reason was to put down in one place just what Ben has accomplished in comparison to Romo.  The resume just is not comparable.  Stats - yes.  Ben's stats have never been that stellar, but what he has accomplished is great in regards to his age, the type of offense he has to run, and a life-threatening injury.  He has many years ahead of him, barring injury, and hopefully many good things to come.  To compare the two just is not possible.  You make the argument that people are not judged on winning, and you bring up Peyton.  You say that he was considered a winner, even before the superbowl.  But that is simply incorrect.  Outside of Indianapolis, before winning Peyton was identified almost solely on the fact that in his ENTIRE career, he had never won a championship.  It dogged him his whole life, and was talked about by fans, the media, and even himself all the time.  You think that he didn't breathe a freaking huge sigh of relief when he finally won?  

Marino himself has said many times that his records mean nothing in the face of never winning it all.  In the NFL, nothing means more.  Nothing.  If you can't win in the playoffs, you more than likely will not last. Just ask Marty.  Sure, there are exceptions, Marino being the biggest(oh lordy, why did we ever pass him up in the draft?  Still stings).  Kelly is up there too.  A great qb, but never able to pull it out.  Is Trent Dilfer judged as a better qb than Kelly?  Of course not.  But that does not change the fact that he is a SUPERBOWL WINNER, and Kelly is not.  I am not saying whether or not Romo is better than Ben.  I personally think that skillwise, the two are pretty similar, and their stats say the same.  I am not saying that Ben will one day be in the HOF, and Romo will not.  Obviously, it is moronic to try to predict something like that.  But to say that Romo has had better acheivements, and to place him on such a pedestal for what you believe he will do in the years to come is foolish.  Your prerogative sure, but foolish all the same.

by steelerark on Mar 27, 2008 7:56 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I'm not basing it on achievemants
Nothing against Ben, he's a good QB, but I just think Romo is better and that by the time their careers are over Romo will have more rings than Ben.

Just my opinion, as I'm pretty confident in Romo's abilities.

by Terry on Mar 27, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

So you're basing it on your feelings
which means have no true arguments, only hopes.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 28, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

not feelings, but what I see
when I watch them play, I think Romo is a better QB. Problem is with you guys, you haven't watched Romo play as often as I have watched both Romo and Ben. I live in western Pa and see both of them play each week.

My opinion is therefore more qualified as I'm sure you only watch highlights and only a few games a year of Tony, if that.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I wish
I see just as much if not more Cowboys games than I see Steelers games.

by cgolden on Mar 28, 2008 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

then you should know how good
Romo really is unless you're just a hater which I suppose you are by your past comments.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

geez
At this point, lets just agree to disagree before my head explodes. You love Romo and I love Ben.

by cgolden on Mar 28, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I've conceded that from the
beginning of this post. They are both great QBs and its who you like better, its as simple as that.

by Terry on Mar 28, 2008 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're inconsistent
First you claimed Romo was GREAT (better than all except Brady and Manning), and stated your reasons why, then, when you were rebutted clear evidence of the QBs (i.e. Ben) having more accomplishments and a greater window of opportunity, you claim that you conceded it's all matter of opinion.  What you have proven consistently is a lack of credibility with poor and/or inconsistent arguments.  As Blitzburgh said in response to one of your first posts, you have dropped the level of discourse on this blog.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 29, 2008 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to BTSC, a blog dedicated to the SIX-time world champion Steelers.

"Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history."

Art Rooney Jr.

"Level-headed thinking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Start posting about the Steelers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

Comcast NFL RedZone Moments from SB Nation

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
BTSC 2010 NFL Mock Drafts : Updated 03/16 (4 round edition)
Fear_the_turtle_small
2009 Offensive Third Down Efficiency
92_avatar_small
State of the Steelers
09_mc501_hemlet_105270_small
A Look Ahead at the Offseason and Five Four-Round Mock Drafts
Small
BTSC Predict the Pick

Recent FanPosts

0201091651_1__small
Not For Everyone! (non fooseball)
Tomlin_small
Has Steigerwald Gone Mad?
Small
We need to draft Tebow!!
Me_as_a_simpson_small
Represent Your Team in MHR's Live Mock!
Btsc_pic_small
My final mock draft (I promise)
92_avatar_small
South Park and #7
Ronniebrownjuke_small
Franchise Players
Small
Tomlin in FL looking at Tebow...
Steelersmascot_1_front_75933_small
Does Steeler Nation want Ben as our QB???
Ward_sketch_small
Christmas is over.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Photo link

A Deeper Look At The 2009 Cowboys Running Game

Photo +1 updates

Rams, Redskins Showing Interest In QB Sam Bradford

Photo +1 updates

Conflicting Reports On The Future Of 49ers GM Scot McCloughan

More from SBNation.com >


Site Founder & Editor

Me2_small Michael Bean (Blitz)

Steelers Historian

Steeler_small maryrose

Bringing You Your Daily Six Pack

Plainview_small drinkyourmilkshake