PDA

View Full Version : Who Has The Better QBs ? NFC-East Or AFC-West ?



BlueBlitzer
06-28-2012, 06:54 PM
Of course I pick Eli's Division.

Tuckit91
06-28-2012, 07:06 PM
I pick Fred Flinstone because its grape and has flip flops

GmenFan1980
06-28-2012, 08:41 PM
AFC west

Rivers > Romo (the stat machines)

Palmer = Vick (both had injury issues, Vick better athlete, Palmer better passer IMO)

Payton > RG3 (the newest QB's to the Division)

Eli > Cassel (odd men out)

Bread
06-29-2012, 01:23 AM
Way too many question marks in both divisions to judge. Vick, Cassel and Romo are never healthy. Palmer, Griffin and Peyton need to grasp new offenses. Rivers is carrying the Chargers and Eli is Eli.

TheBookOfEli
06-30-2012, 02:00 PM
NFC South has some pretty good QB's as well.

EazyEManning
06-30-2012, 03:07 PM
AFC west

Rivers > Romo (the stat machines)

Palmer = Vick (both had injury issues, Vick better athlete, Palmer better passer IMO)

Payton > RG3 (the newest QB's to the Division)

Eli > Cassel (odd men out)

NFC East

You're comparing one qb to another, he's asking overall not head to head.. I could just as easily say

Eli>Rivers
Romo>Cassell
RG3<Peyton
Vick=Palmer (I disagree); and have the end result being NFC East on top

The question marks in NFC East are RG3 and Vick's health. Eli and Romo have been solid QB's.

However in the AFC West it's going to be how Peyton does in Denver and if Palmer gets a groove with Oakland. Cassell hasn't shown much at all as a starting QB in KC.

I will ask you this.. If you're an NFL Def Coordinator, are you more afraid of facing a healthy Vick or healthy Palmer? It's a no-brainer imo.

GmenFan1980
06-30-2012, 06:48 PM
AFC west

Rivers > Romo (the stat machines)

Palmer = Vick (both had injury issues, Vick better athlete, Palmer better passer IMO)

Payton > RG3 (the newest QB's to the Division)

Eli > Cassel (odd men out)

NFC East

You're comparing one qb to another, he's asking overall not head to head.. I could just as easily say

Eli>Rivers
Romo>Cassell
RG3<Peyton
Vick=Palmer (I disagree); and have the end result being NFC East on top

The question marks in NFC East are RG3 and Vick's health. Eli and Romo have been solid QB's.

However in the AFC West it's going to be how Peyton does in Denver and if Palmer gets a groove with Oakland. Cassell hasn't shown much at all as a starting QB in KC.

I will ask you this.. If you're an NFL Def Coordinator, are you more afraid of facing a healthy Vick or healthy Palmer? It's a no-brainer imo.


There are Questions for every quarterback going into the season, so sorry I find that a bad argument.

The whole who would I rather face question...I'm always afraid of a running back playing Quarterback i guess. Doesn't mean I think he is better then Palmer just more annoying to stop.

And if were playing the Health game...A Healthy Peyton is better then every other quarterback in both divisions sooo...yeahh

Edit- I would just like to add, if the question was which division had better teams, I would 100% agree the NFC east are better

MikeIsaGiant
07-02-2012, 11:01 AM
If I had to pick a set of these for an all-star team, I'd 100% pick NFC East.

bELIeve_in_Giants
07-02-2012, 02:27 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

GMENAGAIN
07-02-2012, 02:33 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell. </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .. </P>

bELIeve_in_Giants
07-02-2012, 05:54 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

</p>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell. </p>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .. </p>

yeah, I'm not sure what to make of Palmer at this point in time and who knows about RG3 yet.

GmenFan1980
07-02-2012, 07:47 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17;* AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.*

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell.* </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .*. *</P>

Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.

Joe Morrison
07-02-2012, 08:49 PM
AFC west Rivers &gt; Romo (the stat machines) If you count losing playoff games, Eli wins this hands down:</P>


Palmer = Vick (both had injury issues, Vick better athlete, Palmer better passer IMO)Palmer is the true passer but don'tthink he's halfof what he was in his hey day, Vick can't win playoff games, a toss up:</P>


Payton &gt; RG3 (the newest QB's to the Division) I would put Rex over RG3, he'll be the starter for the skins, RG will get killed and walk away with the guaranteed money:</P>


Romo / Rivers /Cassel (odd men out) none of them have won squat</P>

GMENAGAIN
07-02-2012, 10:47 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell. </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .. </P>


Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.</P>


Are you familiar with a statistic called interceptions?</P>


Romo - 31 TD's and 10 INT's = sick year</P>


Rivers - 27 TD's and 20 INT's = off year</P>

GmenFan1980
07-02-2012, 11:19 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17;* AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.*

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell.* </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .*. *</P>


Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.</P>


Are you familiar with a statistic called interceptions?</P>


Romo - 31 TD's and 10 INT's = sick year</P>


Rivers - 27 TD's and 20 INT's = off year</P>

are you actually saying Interceptions determine whether someone had a good year or not?

Edit- for further clarification, i'm not saying Rivers had an all-star year or anything. I just don't believe he was as bad as people make his season out to be.

GMENAGAIN
07-03-2012, 06:41 AM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell. </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .. </P>


Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.</P>


Are you familiar with a statistic called interceptions?</P>


Romo - 31 TD's and 10 INT's = sick year</P>


Rivers - 27 TD's and 20 INT's = off year</P>


are you actually saying Interceptions determine whether someone had a good year or not? Edit- for further clarification, i'm not saying Rivers had an all-star year or anything. I just don't believe he was as bad as people make his season out to be.</P>


Yes, I am actually saying that interceptions are in important factor in determining whether or not a QB had a good year or not. </P>


Are you actually saying that interceptions should be completely ignored in determining whether or not a QB had a good year (since you completely ignored interceptions in your first post comparing Romo and Rivers)?</P>


Are you actually denying that Rivers had an off year last year?</P>


2008 - 34 TD's, 11 INT's, QB Rating: 105.5</P>


2009 - 28 TD's, 9 INT's, QB Rating: 104.4</P>


2010 - 30 TD's, 13 INT's, QB Rating: 101.8</P>


2011 - 27 TD's, 20 INT's, QB Rating: 88.7</P>


</P>


</P>

Ntegrase96
07-03-2012, 10:27 AM
I'm just curious as to why Rivers is considered better than Romo?

Seems to be the consensus here and I can sort of see it, but don't understand why it's seemingly unanimous.

GMENAGAIN
07-03-2012, 10:40 AM
I'm just curious as to why Rivers is considered better than Romo? Seems to be the consensus here and I can sort of see it, but don't understand why it's seemingly unanimous.</P>


I think that there is no question that Romo had a better year than Rivers last year.</P>


</P>

GmenFan1980
07-03-2012, 01:24 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17;* AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.*

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell.* </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .*. *</P>


Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.</P>


Are you familiar with a statistic called interceptions?</P>


Romo - 31 TD's and 10 INT's = sick year</P>


Rivers - 27 TD's and 20 INT's = off year</P>


are you actually saying Interceptions determine whether someone had a good year or not? Edit- for further clarification, i'm not saying Rivers had an all-star year or anything. I just don't believe he was as bad as people make his season out to be.</P>


Yes, I am actually saying that interceptions are in important factor in determining whether or not a QB had a good year or not.* </P>


Are you actually saying that interceptions should be completely ignored in determining whether or not a QB had a good year (since you completely ignored interceptions in your first post comparing Romo and Rivers)?</P>


Are you actually denying that Rivers had an off year last year?</P>


2008 - 34 TD's, 11 INT's, QB Rating: 105.5</P>


2009 - 28 TD's, 9 INT's, QB Rating: 104.4</P>


2010 - 30 TD's, 13 INT's, QB Rating: 101.8</P>


2011 - 27 TD's, 20 INT's, QB Rating: 88.7</P>


*</P>


*</P>

Yes!!!!! that is exactly what i'm saying http://boards.giants.com/emoticons/emotion-18.gif

Sorry, although I think interceptions are important, i hate when people put more weight into that 1 stat then any other one.

guess I just expect less stats from an "off year" then most people.

Did Rivers have a better year then Romo? No, not really i'll agree to that. But should he still be considered the better quarterback between the two? yes, I believe he should.

GMENAGAIN
07-03-2012, 01:52 PM
I'd say:

1) Eli
2) Peyton (have to put him second until we see how the arm is doing)
3) Rivers
4) Romo
5) Vick
6) Cassell
7) RG3
8) Palmer


So, if you add up their ranking with the lower number the better, NFC = 17; AFC = 19

Slight edge to NFC East, but it's really a wash.

</P>


I think that I would flip-flop Rivers and Romo (neither has won a SB but Romo's numbers were sick last year and Rivers had an off year), and would put Palmer ahead of RGIII and Cassell. </P>


Still gives you the same 17-19 score . . . .. </P>


Rivers had more yards then Romo and only 4 less touchdowns. their stats were very similar, I find it odd how one was "sick" and one was an "off year" :/.</P>


Are you familiar with a statistic called interceptions?</P>


Romo - 31 TD's and 10 INT's = sick year</P>


Rivers - 27 TD's and 20 INT's = off year</P>


are you actually saying Interceptions determine whether someone had a good year or not? Edit- for further clarification, i'm not saying Rivers had an all-star year or anything. I just don't believe he was as bad as people make his season out to be.</P>


Yes, I am actually saying that interceptions are in important factor in determining whether or not a QB had a good year or not. </P>


Are you actually saying that interceptions should be completely ignored in determining whether or not a QB had a good year (since you completely ignored interceptions in your first post comparing Romo and Rivers)?</P>


Are you actually denying that Rivers had an off year last year?</P>


2008 - 34 TD's, 11 INT's, QB Rating: 105.5</P>


2009 - 28 TD's, 9 INT's, QB Rating: 104.4</P>


2010 - 30 TD's, 13 INT's, QB Rating: 101.8</P>


2011 - 27 TD's, 20 INT's, QB Rating: 88.7</P>


</P>


</P>


Yes!!!!! that is exactly what i'm saying http://boards.giants.com/emoticons/emotion-18.gif Sorry, although I think interceptions are important, i hate when people put more weight into that 1 stat then any other one. guess I just expect less stats from an "off year" then most people. Did Rivers have a better year then Romo? No, not really i'll agree to that. But should he still be considered the better quarterback between the two? yes, I believe he should.</P>


When I said that Rivers had an "off" year I was just speaking strictly interms of comparing his 2011 to his past few seasons.</P>


His "off" yearcould be a considered a decent year for many other QB's in the league.</P>


I guess that I'm still bitter because I spent a high draft pick on him in fantasy football thinking that he was going to have a monster year . . . . .</P>

Flip Empty
07-04-2012, 04:15 AM
I guess that I'm still bitter because I spent a high draft pick on him in fantasy football thinking that he was going to have a monster year . . . . . </P>
Hah, I took Gates thinking the same...