Saints @ Seahawks?
Dave99B
Posts: 8,534 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Are you ready for some 'real' football?
Sea 24 - N.O. 21
Dave
Sea 24 - N.O. 21
Dave
Always looking for original, better date VF20-VF35 Barber quarters and halves, and a quality beer.
0
Comments
6 points is *way* too much, IMO. Think it will either come down to a FG or NO winning straight up.
New Orleans 24
I would take both of these QB's over Romo.
<< <i>Based on all the stats given here Seattle should win but it's hard to go against Breese(sp).
I would take both of these QB's over Romo. >>
You would take Russell Wilson over Romo? You truly know nothing about the QB position. And how can you not know how to spell Drew Brees" name? Really?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Do you REALLY think Romo is better than Wilson????? >>
As strictly a pocket passer, he is.
If you include the mobility, the incredible accuracy while being mobile, and the fact he actually knows how to win when it counts, Wilson wins by a mile.
<< <i>Do you REALLY think Romo is better than Wilson????? >>
You really think Wilson is better than Romo?
You think their record might stem, from, oh, I don't know, an ELITE defense (#2 in yards and points allowed per game) as well as an ELITE running game (#3)? If you still, after all this time, are that unable (or unwilling, which is much more likely) to accept and realize that the Seahawks' success isn't derived from Wilson's QB play (they're 24th in passing yards, for christ's sake!)
I'm a BIG10 man.
Never knew who Wilson was until his Wisconsin season and have been a fan ever since.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
And the Romo did it again thread was started because he blew the game....NOT just because Dallas lost. Romo is not always the reason Dallas loses and he is NOT the only problem in Dallas. I have noted before about the owner the coach and the defense. I think barring injury the defense has enough talent, but needs the right system and coach. And Garrett has to go. I am hoping Jones will get tired of Garrett and replace him. We can't get rid of Jones so I have to hope for other changes. Romo has had 7 years and has had chances to win and just has not got it done. I'm just ready for a change at QB. You like him and I don't for the very reasons I have stated as well as many others. JUST READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID.
Why are we all wrong and YOU are right??????
<< <i>
<< <i>Do you REALLY think Romo is better than Wilson????? >>
You really think Wilson is better than Romo?
You think their record might stem, from, oh, I don't know, an ELITE defense (#2 in yards and points allowed per game) as well as an ELITE running game (#3)? If you still, after all this time, are that unable (or unwilling, which is much more likely) to accept and realize that the Seahawks' success isn't derived from Wilson's QB play (they're 24th in passing yards, for christ's sake!) >>
I take it you've never watched a 'Hawks game? Or missed last year in ATL? His yards aren't due to inability, but a narrow approach of stat glancing wouldn't show you that.
Oh, and put Romo in Seattle's offense, they become a 6-5 team.
<< <i>
I take it you've never watched a 'Hawks game? Or missed last year in ATL? His yards aren't due to inability, but a narrow approach of stat glancing wouldn't show you that.
Oh, and put Romo in Seattle's offense, they become a 6-5 team. >>
I never said his passing yards were due to inability now did I? How about you stick to what I said instead of what you wanted me to say?
Put Romo in Seattle and they're 6-5? LOL I think you and dimeman share the same brain! We've already seen what happens when you give Romo an elite defense and running game - he goes 13-3 and into the second round of the playoffs. If you don't think Wilson benefits AT ALL from having Beast Mode back there, then you don't know football. Romo, on the other hand, is solely responsible for his team winning the game. Dallas ranks 31st in rushing attempts (only Atlanta runs less). Seattle is ranked second. Seattle gains nearly twice as many yards on the ground as Dallas does. Passing attempts? It's flipped. Only SF has thrown the ball less than Seattle. Romo has thrown over 400 times this year (!!!) and Wilson just 286. Despite that massive difference, and the fact that defenses don't have to respect Dallas' running game AT ALL, Romo only has one more interception than Wilson.
So no, the idea that the Seahawks would be worse with Romo is flat out WRONG.
The Dallas D is Division II compared to Seattle, and Lynch is MUCH better than Murray. An elite D and a superior running game are the key ingredients to winning a Super Bowl. Carroll is also a better coach than Garrett, too.
Put Wilson in as the Dallas starting QB, and they are a below .500 team.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Put Romo in while both tackles and the center are out, and you can take away 5 TDs, add 20 sacks and 6 INTs to what Wilson suffered during the same time. Romo doesn't survive like Wilson does....Wilson can produce like Romo if Seattle was a pass happy offense (see last year in ATL out of necessity), so I take Wilson every single Sunday- and because I choose Wilson, I will have more Sundays to play.
Happy Thanksgiving you turkey.
<< <i>If Dallas had the Seattle D and Lynch at RB with Romo at QB, they'd be a Super Bowl favorite.
The Dallas D is Division II compared to Seattle, and Lynch is MUCH better than Murray. An elite D and a superior running game are the key ingredients to winning a Super Bowl. Carroll is also a better coach than Garrett, too.
Put Wilson in as the Dallas starting QB, and they are a below .500 team. >>
And if you put Romo in the read-option, he's lucky to play 1/4 of the season. Two totally different quarterbacks in two totally different schemes with two totally different skill sets.
PS - If Aunt Edna has testies, she would be Uncle Ed.
<< <i>
<< <i>If Dallas had the Seattle D and Lynch at RB with Romo at QB, they'd be a Super Bowl favorite.
The Dallas D is Division II compared to Seattle, and Lynch is MUCH better than Murray. An elite D and a superior running game are the key ingredients to winning a Super Bowl. Carroll is also a better coach than Garrett, too.
Put Wilson in as the Dallas starting QB, and they are a below .500 team. >>
And if you put Romo in the read-option, he's lucky to play 1/4 of the season. Two totally different quarterbacks in two totally different schemes with two totally different skill sets.
PS - If Aunt Edna has testies, she would be Uncle Ed. >>
True, but it was Cnote who first made the "what if" comparison, not me. That said, there is no question that if you put ANY competent NFL QB at the helm of a team with a ferocious D like Seattle and a premier RB like Lynch, that said team is going to be a bonafide contender for a Super Bowl championship. Wilson is a fine QB, but there is no question he benefits greatly from these assets, both of which Dallas is painstakingly short on.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
But Wilson has more 'big play' ability with is feet, and is obviously less prone to the boner plays that seem to plaque Romo. That said, I worry every time he runs .... lotta big boys running around out there. Very concerning.
Go Hawks!
Dave
<< <i>True, but it was Cnote who first made the "what if" comparison, not me. That said, there is no question that if you put ANY competent NFL QB at the helm of a team with a ferocious D like Seattle and a premier RB like Lynch, that said team is going to be a bonafide contender for a Super Bowl championship. Wilson is a fine QB, but there is no question he benefits greatly from these assets, both of which Dallas is painstakingly short on. >>
Sorry, didn't realize it started with cnote.
Having a top ranked D and solid running game doesn't guarantee squat. Just look at the Texans.
As far as the Romo/Wilson comparison goes, how does one even say Wilson is on the same level of existence? Because his team is better therefore he has a better record? It's comical at best to suggest that the Seahawks with Romo would be 6-5, despite the overwhelming evidence showing that, despite opposing defenses that are keyed solely on stopping the pass (with Dallas having the second worst running game in the league), Romo is still able to complete 64% of his passes, only throw 7 INTs, despite having to throw twice as many times as they run.
Wilson is a fine QB - but he's not asked to do anywhere near the amount of work or shoulder the amount of the load that Romo is tasked with. Throw in the unending scrutiny by a lazy sports media and even lazier fans, and it's even more remarkable this undrafted player is able to perform at the elite level he is. Give him a top 3 running game and defense (like he had just one year) and you'll see the 13-3 record and playoff win. Ask any elite QB to consistently win with abysmal running and an even worse defense, and they'll give you the same results that are currently happening in Dallas.
You can't take away from Wilson just because he has the defense and running game. Their offense is run first and Dallas is pass first. Wilson still has to make the plays and he makes the right decisions.
It's just as stupid as saying Bradshaw was no good....he just had everything too....Bull $hit!! He still had to make the plays. Look how the Steelers did when Bradshaw was out and the had to play the backup.
You can rag on Bradshaw and Aikman all you want.....BUT they were great QB's that played great and knew how to win. Romo does not have that. He has pure throwing talent and that is it. He doesn't read defense as good and makes very bad decisions at crucial times.
So, a good defense benefits the quarterback....because he doesn't have to throw to play catch up? Is that it? Or is it that you all think Wilson couldn't put up the numbers Romo does?
As I said before, out of necessity, Seattle became a pass first team in the playoff game in ATL last year- Wilson's #'s were fine. IF for some sad reason he had to play in Dallas, it is HIM (Wilson) that would make the RB better, not how you all view it with Lynch making Wilson better.
Lastly, you put Romo on this exact Seattle team and have him deal with the offensive line injuries, constant pressure, and the WRs not getting separation (until Wilson buys them the time with his legs) and that Seattle time is sitting at 6-5. THAT is the point I am making- but feel free to ignore it, spin it, and change the subject.
Some of you assume if there was a pocket passer on this team, it becomes a pass-first offense, and that would not happen.
<< <i>Put up all the stats you want and compare him to other QB's but the fact still remains. Wilson is a winner and he'll prove it to many more people Monday night. >>
The biggest stat '85 has ignored and I pointed out. Oh well.
Yes, let's look at that, shall we? In 1976, a season in which the Steelers would go on to win the Super Bowl spearheaded by an exceptional defense and a great RB by the name of Franco Harris, when Bradshaw missed 6 games due to injury, the Steelers had to turn to the immortal Mike Kruczek as their starting QB for six games. His record in those six games? 6-0.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Put up all the stats you want and compare him to other QB's but the fact still remains. Wilson is a winner and he'll prove it to many more people Monday night. >>
You mean when he rolls out on the field with a top two defense and running game and is asked to throw the ball less than any the qb in the league?
If he's a winner why didn't he reach the super bowl last year?
<< <i>
<< <i>Put up all the stats you want and compare him to other QB's but the fact still remains. Wilson is a winner and he'll prove it to many more people Monday night. >>
You mean when he rolls out on the field with a top two defense and running game and is asked to throw the ball less than any the qb in the league?
If he's a winner why didn't he reach the super bowl last year? >>
As I thought, you didn't watch the playoffs last year. The reason Seattle didn't make it to the Super Bowl? That defense whose sack you are juggling, well, they couldn't stop Atlanta after Wilson showed everyone with half a brain that he is an excellent (miles ahead of Romo) QB and brought them back to LEAD the game with less than a minute left.
As for the main topic of this discussion - Seattle wins 27 - 20.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Put up all the stats you want and compare him to other QB's but the fact still remains. Wilson is a winner and he'll prove it to many more people Monday night. >>
You mean when he rolls out on the field with a top two defense and running game and is asked to throw the ball less than any the qb in the league?
If he's a winner why didn't he reach the super bowl last year? >>
As I thought, you didn't watch the playoffs last year. The reason Seattle didn't make it to the Super Bowl? That defense whose sack you are juggling, well, they couldn't stop Atlanta after Wilson showed everyone with half a brain that he is an excellent (miles ahead of Romo) QB and brought them back to LEAD the game with less than a minute left. >>
So when they lose its the teams fault when they win its Wilson's ability.
Got it.
You'd make a horrible politician- can't spin it your way so you pout and give up.
Seattle finishes Monday 11-1 and scarface limps off the field.
<< <i>LMFAO
You'd make a horrible politician- can't spin it your way so you pout and give up.
Seattle finishes Monday 11-1 and scarface limps off the field. >>
No. You want to point to Wilson as the reason for the team wins and the defense for the losses. This isn't how a team sport like football works. Maybe someday you'll be able to grasp it but until then you're as clueless as dimeman.
Grow some football IQ then we can have a discussion. Until then you're a fool for believing that a top three defense and running game aren't instrumental to the seahawks success.
<< <i>S
It's just as stupid as saying Bradshaw was no good....he just had everything too....Bull $hit!! He still had to make the plays. Look how the Steelers did when Bradshaw was out and the had to play the backup.
You can rag on Bradshaw and Aikman all you want.....BUT they were great QB's that played great and knew how to win. Romo does not have that. He has pure throwing talent and that is it. He doesn't read defense as good and makes very bad decisions at crucial times. >>
Bradshaw's QB replacements during those Super Bowl years had the same winning percentage as Bradshaw, and their passer ratings were within a couple of points. In fact, Bradshaw was benched during the Super Bowl years.
Aikman, without the elite supporting cast, was not capable of leading his to to an above .500 record.
Pretty sure this is a preview of the NFC championship and this game has home field advantage implifications. There is a lot at stake and both teams know it. Good teams overcome injuries (suspensions) all the time, I think the Seahawks can overcome and win. Seattle wins 38-24
<< <i>I know I'll be at the game Monday night, decked out in my Seahawk gear cheering my team on as part of the 12th man crowd. >>
Safe to assume you're going to have a Cajun themed tailgate, right?
Dave
BUT BECAUSE HE MAKES THE PLAYS AND DOESN"T MAKE THE BONER DECISIONS!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!!
<< <i>Yes, Wilson is better than Romo. Not because of the defense....not because of the RB....
BUT BECAUSE HE MAKES THE PLAYS AND DOESN"T MAKE THE BONER DECISIONS!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!! >>
Yes, that was Russell Wilson out there holding the explosive NO offense to under 150 yards passing and scoring a defensive TD to set the tone early.
Dimeman, can you do your fellow (and true) Cowboy fans a favor, and just pick yourself another team to root for already. Sheesh.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I can see NE beating Denver again in the AFC, though.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
BUT BECAUSE HE MAKES THE PLAYS AND DOESN"T MAKE THE BONER DECISIONS!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!! >>
So the fact that Romo only has one more interception that Wilson despite throwing over 100 more times means nothing to you, especially given the FACTS that Seattle runs more than nearly every other team while Dallas runs less than just about any other team, either.
Good lord you are a dense one.
<< <i>
<< <i>
BUT BECAUSE HE MAKES THE PLAYS AND DOESN"T MAKE THE BONER DECISIONS!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!! >>
So the fact that Romo only has one more interception that Wilson despite throwing over 100 more times means nothing to you, especially given the FACTS that Seattle runs more than nearly every other team while Dallas runs less than just about any other team, either.
Good lord you are a dense one. >>
You're the dense one. In fact, you're a pretty big bonehead.